a ban of which was unbeknown to Advocate John Gerry before then. John Gerry was then compelled to return from the airport to his home without his passport. 21. After leaving the airport, John Gerry received a call from the airport's security to say that a new criminal case (Criminal Case Number 54/2022) had just been opened against him and that he should return to the airport to be re-arrested. Regarding Advocate John Gerry's National Passport, the caller stated that it was INTERPOL which had issued the travel ban and seized the Passport. The Advocate persevered and appealed to the Senior Prosecutor, claiming that he enjoyed immunity and that the South Sudan's Code of Criminal Procedure prohibits the institution of new criminal proceedings by the same party to an ongoing case. 22. The Complainants further stated that on 27 February 2022, the Senior Prosecutor ordered that the files for the two cases (Criminal Case Number 376/2021 and Criminal Case Number 54/2022) be referred to his office to decide whether the application for withdrawal of the new case should be accepted or whether the two criminal cases should be considered for joinder. The Lologo II Police Station refused to execute the Senior Prosecutor's order and insisted on executing the new detention order. Meanwhile, Mading continued to-intimidate th~:complai'nants. The Advocate and other complainants were often searched and intimidated, and prevented from moving freely around Juba. ,( . ;~',:: ". 23. The Complainants avow that there is no hope of suctesspn the case locally and that they have looked for local remedies to have their case heardby a competent court, but found a non-promising procedure and continue to face more violations, due to unwillingness of the Respondent State to enforce its laws to protect victims of human rights violations. Articles alleged to have been violated: 24. The Complainants allege violation of Articles 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10(1), 12(1) and (2), 14, 16(1), 18 (1) and (3), 75 and 26 of the African Charter. t '~;9 Prayers: 1. The Complainants prays the Commission to: • Declare thatthe Respondent State violated her Rights as provided in Articles 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10(1), 12(1) and (2), 14, 16(1), 18 (1) and (3), 25 and 26 of the African Charter; • Order the Respondent State to remedy the situation, including compensation, review of legislation, and training of police officers; • Order the Respondent State to do the following: 1) pay USD 300,000 to the advocate as compensation for material and moral damages; 2) pay USD150,000 to Rose Modong Samuel, Isaac Jugar, Hellen Ojaba and their 4 children as compensation for material and moral damages; 3) pay USD21,000 USD to Madong as compensation for material and moral damages arising from the destruction of the wall on thei ",. 0'e1f . nd F ok*' sE'b~1" "'1- ~ shop, and the loss of farm produce; ..,0 r4~/ ~~ ~ 4) ~~ 0 order the return of the land seized by Mading Ngo~_;A,f~, 'i.~~l number 69, Block A III, Lologo; ; ~ \}:, ~ 77th Ordinary Session of the ACHPR 4(.).(,) Plo\ : J:S. ('", (.l~.'--._:__'./,ct' ',..~. -, t...,. 0' C. ~'''.'E. ut":) ....r-. -, ,c. f>flJf'\·< c: 4