having signed an MoU with the AU … it is accordingly formally recognised by the AU, thus meeting the criteria set forth by this Honourable Court.” 20. To illustrate its involvement all over Africa, it affirms that it “is routinely involved in the activities of the Office of the Legal Counsel of the AU (OLC-AU); Department of Political Affairs of the African Union Commission (DPA-AUC); African Court; African Commission; African Union Commission on International Law (AUCIL); African Union Advisory Board on Corruption (AUABC) and the Pan African Parliament (PAP), amongst others”. 21. The Author affirms that it “also regularly engages the African Regional Economic Communities (RECs), including the East African Community (EAC), Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD), Southern African Development Community (SADC) and the International Conference of the Great Lakes Region (ICGLR), especially on their interface with the AU.” *** 22. To determine whether it has personal jurisdiction, the Court must satisfy itself that the Request has been filed by one of the entities contemplated under Article 4(1) of the Protocol.7 In the instant case, the question that arises is whether the Author is an “African organization recognised by the AU” in the meaning of this provision of the Protocol. 7 Request for Advisory Opinion by The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (Advisory Opinion) (26 May 2017) 2 AfCLR 572, § 38. 7