the cases of Michel Thierry Atangana Abega v. Cameroon and Karim Wade v. Senegal which share strong similarities with the present Communication. 128. The Commission notes that following an appeal proceedings which was not allowed by the law, the Complainant was later sentenced by the Centre Region Court of Appeal to 15 years’ imprisonment. He was also tried by a Special Tribunal that was subsequently established. At the time of this decision, proceedings are still ongoing against him at the Supreme Court. 129. In this regard, the Commission is of the view that the present consideration is about alleged violations of the provisions of the Charter concerning the proceedings that led to the decision to release the Complainant which was not subject to appeal. The various violations alleged in this Communication were the subject of appeals before the competent national authorities without success. 130. The subsequent appeal proceedings and before the Supreme Court were conducted in violation of the law or on the basis of charges subsequent to the release decision whose authority was violated by the Respondent State. Even considering the appeal proceedings and before the Supreme Court, the rights protected under Articles 6 and 7 of the Charter have already been violated. 131. By virtue of these reasons, the Commission is of the view that the Complainant’s detention is arbitrary. As such, it is necessary to conclude that Article 6 of the Charter has been violated. On the other hand, since the Complainant failed to prove the impartiality of the national courts, the Commission cannot take a decision on the violation of the related right. Prayers of the Complainant 38