Procedure 20. The communication was received at the Secretariat of the African Commission on 4th April 2005. 21. By letter of 20th April 2005 the Secretariat acknowledged receipt thereof informing the Complainant that the communication has been registered as communication 299/05 - Anuak Justice Council/Ethiopia and that the communication will be considered on seizure at the 37th Ordinary Session of the African Commission. 22. At its 37th Ordinary Session held in Banjul, The Gambia from 27th April to 11th May 2005, the African Commission considered the communication and decided to be seized thereof. 23. By Note Verbale of 24th May 2005 the Secretariat of the African Commission notified the State of the African Commission's decision and forwarded the complaint to the State with a request for the latter to make its submission on the merits within three months of the notification. By letter of 24th May 2005, the Secretariat of the African Commission informed the Complainant of the African Commission's decision. 24. On 23rd August 2005, the Secretariat received the Respondent State's submissions on admissibility. 25. On 25th August 2005, the Secretariat transmitted the Respondent State's submission on admissibility to the Complainant, requesting the latter to respond thereto before 25th September. 26. On 21 [sic] complainant wrote to the Secretariat informing the latter that the legal representative of the Anuak Justice Council had changed adding that they received the Secretariat's letter of 25th August only on 9th September and would like the deadline for the submission of their arguments on admissibility to be moved to 9th October 2005. The Complainant also requested for provisional measures to be taken by the African Commission. 27. On 10th October 2005, the Secretariat received the Complainant's response on the Respondent State's submissions on admissibility. 28. On 19th October 2005, the Secretariat transmitted the Complainant's response to the Respondent State with a request to the latter to make its comments, if any, before 31st October 2005. 29. At its 38th Ordinary Session, the African Commission deferred consideration on the admissibility of the communication and to enable the Secretariat get additional information from the parties. 30. By Note Verbale of 19th January 2006 and by letter of the same date, the Secretariat of the African Commission notified the parties of the African Commission's decision. 31. At its 39th Ordinary Session held in Banjul, The Gambia from 11th to 25th May 2006, the African Commission considered the communication and decided to declare it inadmissible. 32. By Note Verbale of 29th May 2006 and by letter of the same date, both parties were notified of the African Commission's decision. Complainant's submission on admissibility 33. The Complainant submits that Article 56(5) of the African Charter requires that complainants exhaust domestic remedies before a case is considered by the African Commission. The Complainant notes further that if the potential domestic remedies are unavailable or unduly prolonged, the Commission may nevertheless consider a communication, adding that this is especially true when the country against which the complaint is lodged has committed vast and varied scope of violations and the general situation in the country is such that domestic exhaustion would be futile. 34. The Complainant argue that in the Anuak Justice Council case, pursuing domestic remedies would be futile due to the lack of an independent and impartial judiciary, a lack of an efficient remedy, the significant likelihood of an unduly prolonged domestic remedy, and most importantly, the potential for violence against the Anuak or those supporting them within the legal system. 35. Anuak Justice Council alleges that it cannot seek exhaustion of domestic remedies because of its inability to receive an independent and fair hearing, as a direct consequence of the fact that the aggressor is the government of Ethiopia. The Complainant notes that in spite the protection in Article 78 × 1. An independent judiciary is established by this Constitution. 2. Supreme Federal judicial authority is vested in the Federal Supreme Court. The House of Peoples' Representatives may, by two-thirds majority vote, establish nationwide, or in some parts of the country only, the Federal High Court and First-Instance Courts it deems necessary. Unless decided in this manner, 3