ci"'fi) 6�!:tEB Human Rights our Collective Respons1bil1ty Human ancl Peoples' Rights were arrested for breakdancing. The Complainant averred that they were finally transferred to 'Omdurman Prison,' where they spent ten days before being released. mnxl' , 11. The Complainant alleged that upon release from Omdurman Prison, following 78 days of incommunicado detention. During this period, he suffered severe physical and psychological harm, losing approximately 37kg of his original weight; he was forced to remain in Sudan for eight months because both he and Mr. al-Mahdi faced charges under ' Article 23 of the Electronics Act/Informatic Offences (Combating) Act.'2, which prevented them from leaving the country until the charges were adjudicated. The Complainant averred that he could not afford his legal representative and relied on Mr. al-Mahdi's lawyer to represent him in the case. 12. The Complainant stated that on 06 December 2011, the judge found Mr. al­ Mahdi not guilty, while he was found guilty under the Act and was ordered to either pay a fine of 5000 Sudanese Pounds (SDG) or return to Omdurman Prison for six months. The Complainant refused to pay the fine and was taken into custody. Mr. al-Mahdi's lawyer appealed the guilty verdict on the same day on behalf of the Complainant. However, on the same day, Mr. al-Mahdi's mother paid the fine, and the Complainant was released. Upon his release, the Complainant left the Respondent State and arrived in London on 31 December 2011. In February 2012, the Court stated in the Complainant's absence that the appeal, which was filed on 06 December 2011, "... had been canceled, not denied". 13. The Complainant submitted that upon leaving Sudan on 31 December 2011, he could not raise a complaint about his treatment as he faced threats of re-arrest and imprisonment while in Sudan. To this end, the Complainant stated that he has repeatedly called on the Respondent State to investigate his case through the Government of the United Kingdom (UK). The Complainant added that the Respondent State, in a letter dated 26 May 2013 and received by the Complainant on 02 June 2013, acknowledged the Complainant's arrest but failed to mention the Complainant's allegations against the Respondent State nor any investigations into these allegations. Articles alleged to have been violated: 14. The Complainant alleged that the Respondent State violated Artie 7, 14, and 16 of the African Charter. 2 Complainant's statement of fact para 105; See also Representative's facts, para 42. 3 An Organ of the Afric;an (' -�, Union ';ar. ,'I African Commlss 31 Bijilo A 1a S 04 Email: au-banjul@africa-union.org https:/achpr.au.int/0 0 D