90. Contesting the objection to the admissibility of his Application on grounds of nonexhaustion of local remedies, the Applicant submits that, although the country has in place a number of remedies, all of them may not be applicable to all situations, and that, if a remedy is inadequate in a given case, it is obvious that it does not need to be exhausted . 91. The Applicant also submits that there are exceptions to the rule of prior exhaustion of local remedies and that this Court has already held that where the local remedies are inapplicable, ineffective and unavailable or where they do not offer prospects of success or cannot be used without hindrance by the Applicant, the latter is not required to exhaust the remedies in question. He cites the case of the Constitutional Court and argues that the interference of political power in the affairs of the judicial authorities and the fact that the decisions of the Constitutional Court have never been executed, are all elements that make the remedy before this Court ineffective. 92. The Applicant further refutes the Respondent State's assertion that the procedure to obtain reparation under Article 206 of the Benin Code of Criminal Procedure was available to him. He submits that, in as much as the Attorney General lodged an appeal for the sole purpose of unreasonably prolonging the proceedings and preventing him from obtaining redress, he was no longer able, in that state of confusion, to exercise the remedy set out in Article 206 of the Benin Code of Criminal Procedure. 93. He further avers that, given the total lack of an independent and impartial judiciary, the remedies provided under Article 206 of the Benin Code of Criminal Procedure, mentioned by the Respondent State, must be considered ineffective and insufficient. 94. With regard to the appeal against CRIET Judgment of 18 October 2018, the Applicant submits that he filed cassation appeal against the decision even though, under the law establishing the special court, cassation appeal does not offer him the possibility of re-examination of the merits of the case . He argues in conclusion that this is an extraordinary remedy which he does not necessarily have to exhaust. I O/ ~ ~