r,.CHPJl ✓� w,., 6� j,e 1 f r) Human andl Peoples' Rights Humao R;ghts out Collect,ve Responsibihty 34. On Article 56(3) of the African Charter, the Complainant submitted that the Communication is presented using respectful language and does not contain disparaging or insulting language. 35. In relation to Article 56(4) of the African Charter, the Complainant submitted that the allegations proffered in the Communication are substantiated using eyewitness testimony, medical and psychological reports, official documents, as well as reports of non-governmental organisations and are not exclusively based on news disseminated through the media. 36. Regarding Article 56(5) of the African Charter, the Complainant submitted that it does not need to exhaust local remedies because the exceptions to exhaust local remedies apply to this Communication on the grounds that the remedies within the Respondent State do not meet the Commission's requirements of availability, effectiveness, and sufficiency. 37. The Complainant adduced three arguments on the grounds that the local remedies within the Respondent State are not available or effective. 38. First, the Complainant argued that the exhaustion of domestic remedies requirement is premised on the principle that the Respondent State should have the first opportunity to redress an alleged wrong. The Complainant contended that the Respondent State had ample opportunity to redress the alleged violations but failed to do so. The Complainant averred that he brought the allegations to the attention of prison staff wherever he was detained, and through the UK officials made multiple representations to the Respondent State calling for a prompt investigation into the allegations of torture and arbitrary detention to no avail. 39. Citing the Commission's decision in multiple Communications, including Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions v The Sudan, the Complainant argued that the exhaustion of domestic remedies is not required in cases where it can be shown that the State failed to remedy a situation despite ample notice and time to do so and further that failure on the part of the State in this regard means that domestic remedies are either not available or if they are, they are not effective or sufficient to redress the alleged violations3• 40. Secondly, the Complainant submitted that he was unable to access domestic remedies on the basis that he was held in incommunicado detention, where he was denied access to a lawyer, the British Embassy, and his f J Communication 296/05, (2000) ACHPR, para 32. M Organ of !he AfriGan ( �\ Union .,,. � 8 African Comm ts t, ia Phone: (2 �3:fd::!�� 5 04 Email: au-ban1ul@africa-union. org https:/achpr. au ,nt/0 0 a