TLS and Others v Tanzania (merits) (2013) 1 AfCLR 34 71 jurisdiction on the Court (See Articles 3 and 5 of the Protocol). How could one consider an objection challenging the jurisdiction of the Court while disregarding the date of entry into force of the Protocol conferring the said jurisdiction on the Court? To me, that is simply inconceivable. 17. Once again, in my opinion, to adequately respond to the specific argument raised by the 2nd Applicant, the Court ought to have clearly endorsed the Respondent’s position, and indicated that the relevant date to be considered with regard to the Respondent in determining its ratione temporis jurisdiction in this matter, should be that of the entry into force of the Protocol establishing the Court, then subsequently rely on the continuing nature of the alleged violation in order to determine its jurisdiction.