a right. It would be improper to insist on the complainants seeking remedies from sources which do not operate impartially and have no obligation to decide according to legal principles. The remedy is neither adequate nor effective. “11. Therefore, the Commission is of the opinion that the remedy available is not of a nature that requires exhaustion according to Article 56, paragraph 5 of the African Charter. Merits “12. The Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act, Section 11, subsection 4 provides: No appeal shall lie from a decision of a tribunal constituted under this Act or from any confirmation or dismissal of such decision by the Governor. “13. A “decision of a tribunal constituted under this Act or any confirmation or dismissal of such decision by the Governor” may certainly constitute an “act violating fundamental rights” as described in Article 7.1.a of the Charter. In this case, the fundamental rights in question are those to life and liberty provided for in Articles 4 and 6 of the African Charter. While punishments decreed as the culmination of a carefully conducted criminal procedure do not necessarily constitute violations of these rights, to foreclose any avenue of appeal to “competent national organs” in criminal cases bearing such penalties clearly violates Article 7.1.a of the African Charter, and increases the risk that severe violations may go unredressed. “14. The Robbery and Firearms (Special Provision) Act, Section 8(1), describes the constitution of the tribunals, which shall consist of three persons; one Judge, one officer of the Army, Navy or Air Force and one officer of the Police Force. Jurisdiction has thus been transferred from the normal courts to a tribunal chiefly composed of persons belonging to the executive branch of government, the same branch that passed the Robbery and Firearms Decree, whose members do not necessarily possess any legal expertise. Article 7.1.d of the African Charters requires the court or tribunal to be impartial. Regardless of the character of the individual members of such tribunals, its composition alone creates the appearance, if not actual lack, of impartiality. It thus violates Article 7.1.d.” 6.3.28. In light of the above, it is the finding of the Court that the trial of the applicants by the Special Military Tribunal as referred to hereinabove, and the denial of the right to appeal to a competent judicial body constitute a violation of Section 7 (1) (a) and (d) of the African Charter. 7.0. Should it be the finding of this court that the Federal Government was in breach of its international obligations as refer to above, is this court competent, and is there evidence sufficient in law for this court, to grant the reliefs sought by the applicants? Page | 19