39. Article 56(4) of the African Charter prohibits Complaints brought before the Commission pursuant to Article 55 from being based exclusively on news disseminated through the mass media. In the present Communication, the Complainant, in addition to his arguments, has annexed substantial volumes of information and evidence in various documents, including letters, legal documents, photos, videos, etc. Upon analysis of the submitted evidence, the Commission found that the factual information is not exclusively based on news disseminated through the mass media. The Commission is, therefore, satisfied that the Communication complies with Article 56(4). Article 56(5) 40. Article 56 (5) requires that Complaints be submitted after exhausting local remedies, if any, unless it is obvious that this procedure is unduly prolonged. It is an established principle of the jurisprudence of the Commission that the requirement for the exhaustion of remedies applies only where such remedies are "available, effective, and sufficient to redress the alleged violation."3 41. In the present case, the Complainant did not specifically address the exhaustion of local remedies or their unavailability, ineffectiveness, and insufficiency. Instead, in a separate document, he broadly outlines the cases he brought before domestic courts, the procedure, and the decisions rendered without specifically addressing how these actions meet the criteria provided under Article 56(5). 42. The Complainant submits that he filed a case in the Regional Court of Mudug concerning the unlawful seizure of his property, including a farm. The Court issued a "50/50 decision," leading the defendant to appeal to the Appellate Regional Court of the Galrnudug Region. 43. The Complainant indicates that during the proceedings in the Court of Appeal, he experienced various illegal manipulations, unfair proceedings, and violations of his rights by the Judge of the Court of Appeal. The Complainant further indicates that the judge accepted witnesses against him from individuals involved in fraudulent activities related to his property, contributing to his unfair treatment during the legal proceedings. 44. The Complainant submits that despite unfair trial and procedural irregularities, the Appellate Regional Court of Galmudug Region ruled against him and case. He also mentioned being involved in a case filed by an ind Communication 147/95-149/96, Sir Davida K. Jaw am v Gambia, (ACHPR), para 31, Rencontre africaine pour la defence des droits de Homme (RADDHO) V. Zambia (ACHPR) 318/06 Open Society Justice Initiative v. Cole d'Ivoire (ACHPR) para 40. 3 I cat (92 I J > AU-UA R»<;»n*~ \ ET obs pa L 1 Q i I I *I (01 Y/