45. In the light of the foregoing, the Commission notes, generally, that in this particular case, local remedies did not exist. Even assuming the Complainants had the opportunity of seizing the Supreme Court of the matter, this remedy would not have been effective. The Commission therefore concludes that the local remedies were exhausted. The Commission’s decision on Admissibility 46. In view of the above, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights declares this Communication Admissible in accordance with Article 56 of the African Charter. Merits The Complainants’ submissions on the Merits 47. On the merits, the Complainants allege that some Articles in the provisions of the African Charter were violated. Furthermore, they submit that the Respondent State violated a number of provisions in respect of other international instruments and the domestic law. The alleged violations of the African Charter relate to 2, 5, 7 and 18. 48. Concerning Article 2 of the African Charter which protects the right to non-discrimination, the Complainants allege that, the fact that the military court declared a closed-door hearing by preventing the media from the trial with the exception of the military press corps subservient to the regime in power was an act of discrimination. 49. In its Article 5, the African Charter guarantees that every individual shall have the right not to be subjected to torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatments. To buttress the violation of this provision, the Complainants allege that being subjected to whipping by State security officers while in detention, and to sentences of life imprisonment, are acts of torture. In addition, they aver that such acts of torture extend to failure to publish the judgment on the sentences, since by this act some of them wallowed in the corridors of death for more than two years. Furthermore, they allege that depriving them of the right to get in touch with their families is an inhuman treatment. 50. Regarding Article 7 of the African Charter, the Complainants allege that several rights related to fair trial have been violated. Concerning Article 7(1) (a), the Complainants allege that their inability to question the legality and the duration of their preventive detention before a court is a violation 9