11 50. The purpose of the Court's contentious jurisdiction is not to review national legislations in their abstract conception. Contentious jurisdiction is intended to resolve specific cases where it may be alleged that an act of a State carried out against certain individuals is contrary to the Convention. In considering the merits of the case, the Court shall have to examine whether or not the conduct of the Government conformed to the Convention, since, as it has already stated: the Court would have to weigh and decide whether the action attributed to the state constitutes a violation of the rights and freedoms protected under the Convention, regardless of whether or not such action is consistent with the state's domestic law . . . (International Responsibility for the Promulgation and Enforcement of Laws in Violation of the Convention (Arts. 1 and 2, American Convention on Human Rights), Advisory Opinion OC-14/94 of December 9, 1994. Series A No. 14, para. 48.) 51. In accordance with the preceding, this objection presented by the Government is admissible only with respect to the Commission's request on the abstract compatibility of Decrees 591 and 600 and the Convention. As far as the other aspects of the application are concerned, the jurisdiction of the Court remains unalterable due to the fact that this matter is independent of the Commission's remaining requests. However, this Court reserves the power to examine in the merits of the case the effects of the application of the cited decrees in relationship to the human rights recognized by the Convention and involved in this case. V 52. In regards to the court costs and attorney's fees which the Government requests the Commission to be liable, the Court does not find it appropriate to order such costs. VI 53. Therefore, THE COURT, unanimously 1. Declares that it is competent to hear the instant case, except regarding the abstract compatibility of Decrees 591 and 600 of Nicaragua with the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights. 2. Rejects the preliminary objections interposed by the Government of Nicaragua, except for the objection relative to the non-exhaustion of internal jurisdictional remedies, which shall be resolved together with the merits of the case. 3. Considers that the objections of the Government of Nicaragua posed in opposition to the statements in the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights' complaint concerning the mandatory nature of its recommendations, are not preliminary objections but rather essential questions on the merits that shall be resolved in due time.