Complainant’s additional arguments and prayers 92. In addition to the arguments developed at the admissibility stage, in particular on the alleged violation of Article 7 of the Charter, the Complainant alleges the violation of his right to liberty and to the security of his person protected under Article 6. Before considering the merits of the Communication, the Commission will first of all examine the Complainant’ additional arguments which include other prayers. 93. In this regard, the Commission is of the view that substantial additional submissions are admissible insofar as they are not based on new facts, are not inconsistent with the issues addressed at admissibility, the author can substantiate and the other party cannot successfully contest. Regarding the facts, the Commission notes that they do not differ between admissibility and merits except that the Complainant recounts a continuation of the violations illustrated mainly by the trial before the Special Criminal Tribunal and the appeal before the Specialized Section of the Supreme Court. The facts on which are based the arguments on the violation of Article 6 cannot thus be considered as new. 94. Regarding compliance with admissibility conditions, the facts on which is based the allegation of the violation of Article 6 are closely linked to those concerning the violation of Article 7. Indeed, the facts alleged at the admissibility stage and relating to the deprivation of liberty were the subject of appeals before the national courts. Moreover, the Complainant sufficiently substantiates the allegations of violation of Article 6. Lastly, even if the Respondent State defaulted, the Social Rights v. Nigeria Communication 155/96 (2001) AHRLR 60 (ACHPR 2001) and Union Interafricaine des Droits de l’Homme and Others v. Angola Communication 159/96 (2000) AHRLR 20 (ACHPR 1997). 26