unless the Complainant provides sufficient justifications why any of the requirements could not be met. 81. In the present Communication, the Complainants claim that this Communication fulfils all the requirements of Article 56 of the African Charter. The Respondent State on the other hand submits that the Complainants have not fulfilled the requirements under Article 56(5) and as such, the African Commission should declare the Communication inadmissible. The Commission would thus analyze the arguments of both parties based on the provisions of Article 56 of the Charter. 82. Article 56(1) of the African Charter states that “Communication relating to Human and Peoples’ Rights… received by the Commission shall be considered if they indicate their authors even if the latter request anonymity…” This Communication is brought before the African Commission by the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights and Interights, the Complainants, on behalf of the victims. In this Communication, the authors as well as the Victims have been identified. The African Commission is therefore of the view that sub-article (1) of Article 56 has been complied with. 83. Article 56(2) of the African Charter states that “Communications…received by the Commission shall be considered if they are compatible with the Charter of the Organization of African Unity or with the present Charter.” The present Communication sets out that Articles 4, 5, 7(1) (a), and 26 of the African Charter have been violated. The Communication is brought against the Arab Republic of Egypt a State Party to the African Charter, and alleges violation of the rights of Mohamed Gayez Sabbah, Mohamed Abdallah AbuGareer and Ossama Mohamed Al-Nakhlawy who are in custody awaiting to be executed by the Respondent State. The African Commission therefore holds that the requirements under Article 56(2) have been fulfilled. 19