26. This is just one of the 7 conditions specified by Article 56, but it is that which usually requires the most attention. Because Article 56 is necessarily the first considered by the Commission, before any substantive consideration of communications, it has already been the subject of substantial interpretation; in the jurisprudence of the African Commission, there are several important precedents. 27. Specifically, in four decisions the Commission has already taken concerning Nigeria, Article 56(5) is analysed in terms of the Nigerian context. Communication 60/91 (Decision ACHPR/60/91) concerned the Civil Disturbances Tribunal; Communication 101/93 (Decision ACHPR/101-93) concerned the Legal Practitioners' Decree; and Communication 129/94 concerned the Constitution (Modification and Suspension) Decree and the Political Parties (Dissolution) Decree. 28. All of the Decrees in question in the above communications contain "ouster" clauses. In the case of the special tribunals, these clauses prevent the ordinary courts from taking up cases placed before the special tribunals or from entertaining any appeals from the decisions of the special tribunals. ( ACHPR/60/91:23 [sic] 1 and ACHPR/87/93:22 [sic]2 ) The Legal Practitioners Decree specifies that it cannot be challenged in court and that anyone attempting to do so commits a crime (ACHPR.101.93:14-15). The Constitution (Modification and Suspension) Decree legally prohibited its challenge in Nigerian courts (ACHPR/129/94:14-15). 29. In all of the cases cited above, the Commission found that the ouster clauses render local remedies non-existent, ineffective or illegal. They create a legal situation in which the judiciary can provide no check on the executive branch of the government. A few courts in the Lagos Division have occasionally found that they have jurisdiction; in 1995, the Court of Appeal in Lagos relying on common law, found that courts could examine decrees notwithstanding their ouster clauses, where the decree is " offensive and utterly hostile to rationality". 30. Prior to the issue of the decree, the publishers affected had brought suits; two of them had already won monetary damages and an order that the security agents should vacate the premises. Neither of these directives was ever complied with. 31. Because there is no legal basis to challenge government action under these decrees, the Commission reiterates its decision on communication 129/94 that "it is reasonable to presume that domestic remedies will not only be prolonged but are certain to yield no results". ( ACHPR 129/94:8). Indeed there is no remedy. For these reasons and consistent with its earlier decisions, the Commission declared the communications admissible. Merits 32. Article 7(1)(a) provides: Every individual shall have the right to have his cause heard. This comprises: (a)The right to an appeal to competent national organs against acts violating his fundamental rights... 33. To have a duly instituted court case in the process of litigation nullified by executive decree forecloses all possibility of jurisdiction being exercised by competent national organs. A civil case in process is itself an asset, one into which the litigants invest resources in the hope of an eventual finding in their favour. The risk of losing the case is one that every litigant accepts, but the risk of having the suit abruptly nullified will seriously discourage litigation, with serious consequence for the protection of individual rights. Citizens who cannot have recourse to the courts of their country are highly vulnerable to violation of their rights. The nullification of the suits in progress thus constitutes a violation of Article 7(1)(a). 34. Communication 141/94 alleges that the Federal Government of Nigeria, through Decrees Nos. 6, 7, and 8 of 1994, restrained and restricted the right of Nigerians to receive information and to express and disseminate their opinions. 35. Article 9 of the African Charter reads: 1. Every individual shall have the right to receive information. 2. Every individual shall have the right to express and disseminate his opinions within the law. 36. Freedom of expression is a basic human right, vital to an individual's personal development and political consciousness, and to his participation in the conduct of public affairs in his country. Under the African Charter, this right comprises the right to receive information and to express one's opinion. 3