sentenced to death by a law and tribunal under the scope and competence of which they did not fall. The Submissions of the Respondent State on Admissibility 31. In its submissions on admissibility, the Respondent State contends for its part that the Communication should be declared inadmissible on the grounds that it does not refer to actual facts but to a collection of media reports and that it deals with an issue which has already been settled. 32. The Respondent State is also of the opinion that the Communication contains inaccuracies in that the Complainants aver that the death sentences were commuted to life imprisonment whereas it was rather otherwise in view of the implementation of the above-mentioned Decree. Such a situation, according to the Respondent State, should lead to inadmissibility of the Communication. 33. On the point of exhaustion of local remedies, the Respondent State recognizes that the Orders of the Military Court cannot be appealed against but submits that a remedy was always available against its Orders. According to the Respondent State, the provisions of Article 175 of the Executive Decision on the Organization of the Judicial System establishing the Rules of Courts, Tribunals and Public Prosecutors Offices 4 provides for compulsory appeal for a pardon by the Officer of the Public Prosecutors Office in case the death penalty is handed down as a last resort. 34. The Respondent State further contends that it is in pursuance of this provision that the Head of State issued a Decree on 2 August 2002 in relation to special measures of pardon for child soldiers and other minors sentenced to the death penalty and other repressive punishments. The Respondent State submits that Diyavanga Nkuyu and Bosey Jean Louis had their death penalty commuted to release for Government service while the capital punishment handed down to Mwati Kabwe, Mbumba Ilunga and Banga Djunga were commuted to imprisonment for 5 years. As for Nanasi Kisala, he is said to have obtained relief from the provisions of Articles 3 and 4 of the above-mentioned Decree by which the death penalty is commuted to time in a government reform school until the 21 st birthday or five years in prison. 35. Finally, the Respondent State contends that Complaints for which the Communication was filed had already been resolved under Decree No. 084/2002 of 2 August 2002 which, as indicated above, had commuted the death sentences into measures for release for Government service or time-bound imprisonments. All these, according to the Respondent State should lead to inadmissibility of the Communication. The Commissions analysis on Admissibility 36. This Communication was filed in accordance with Article 55 of the African Charter which stipulates that the Commission may receive and consider Communications other than those of State Parties . Under Article 56 of the Charter, Communications received pursuant to Article 55 must meet the following conditions before they can be declared admissible: 1. Indicate the identity of their authors even if the latter request anonymity; 2. Are compatible with the Charter of the Organization of African Unity or with the present Charter; 3. Are not written in a disparaging or insulting language directed against the State concerned and its institutions or to the organization of African Unity; 4. Are not based exclusively on news disseminated through the mass media; 5. Are sent after exhausting local remedies, if any, unless it is obvious to the Commission that this procedure for remedies is unduly prolonged; 6. Are submitted within a reasonable period from the time local remedies are exhausted or from the date the Commission is seized of the matter; 5