77. The Commission further notes the Complainants' submission that when they could not obtain redress, they had proceeded to re-lodge the case again against Mading at another Police Division - the Northern Division, but their case was dismissed. However, they had succeeded in an Appeal but the legal process of proceeding further with the case was stalled by Mading's Military Police allies. The Commission further notes that the Complainants were forced to eventually flee from the Respondent State to seek refuge in Uganda, due to continuous intimidation with arrests, blackmailing through fabricated criminal cases and physical attacks and death threats. In this regard, the Commission maintains its reasoning in Article 19 v. Eritrea--, to which the Complainants had alluded. 78. The Commission recalls that in Jawara v Gambiat-, it had recognized a certain level of flexibility to the application of the rule of exhaustion' of local remedies and held that complainants are expected to exhaust local remedies onlyin so far as these remedies are available, effective and sufficient. The Commission further expounded on this by stating that "a remedy is consideredaoqilable ij.the, petit~!it!J:,r.can pursue it without impediment, it is deemed effective if it offers a prospect Of success; and it is found sufficient if it is capable of redressing the complaint'?", '\~~.• ,' , . ',:,~!~:' " .' 79. The Commission notes the reasons advanced by the Complainants) in view of the above, as to why they believe domestic or local remedies are unavailable, ineffective and insufficient, namely: .,;" (i) that the Complainants encountered blockage of the legal proceedings; (ii) that they could not approach the Courts dires,~lydue to Section 5 of the Police Act which limits the liability of the Police, and tha't the units of the Armed forces who perpetrated the violations enjoy- general immunities as a result of which legal proceedings against them is suqject to approval of their superiors, who were unwilling to grant such approval; " \ (iii) that the Transitional Constitution of the Respondent State lacks provisions such as mandamus and certiorari, to enable individuals to apply to the Courts to enforce their Constitutional rights; and (iv) that the Constitutional remedy provided for in Article 306 of the Constitution is a civil remedyand'C:fpnot effectively address a case of criminal nature which can only be det~rrnined;:aH'ercompletion of a criminal investigation by the Police, of which the Complainants complain had blocked the case. 80. It is undeniable' that local remedies are considered available if they can be pursued without impediments, whether practical or legal in nature as stipulated in Human Rights Council and Others v. Ethiopiat+, where the Commission stated that: " ... there must exist relevant substantive and procedural laws, and competent institutions or organs and processes which a complainant can access and utilize in practice without unjustifiable impediments". II Ibidem, para 46 12 Communication IoU a 147/95-149/96 - Sir Dawda K. Jawara v Gambia (The), (ACHP :x; - f! ~I