69. In the instant case therefore, the Complainant could, at the very least, have seized the local courts by way of a writ of habeas corpus to draw the court��s attention to the constitutional provision they claim the government has breached. Lawyers often seek the release of detainees by filing a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. A writ of habeas corpus is a judicial mandate to an arresting officer ordering that an inmate be brought to the court so it can be determined whether or not that person is imprisoned lawfully and whether or not he should be released from custody. A habeas corpus petition is a petition filed with a court by a person who objects to his own or another’s detention or imprisonment. The writ of habeas corpus has been described as “the fundamental instrument for 11 safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary and lawless state action.” It serves as an important check on the manner in which the courts pay respect to constitutional rights. 70. The Complainant in their submissions does acknowledge that they did send a writ of habeas corpus to the Minister of Justice. The African Commission is of the view that even though it expected the Minister to advise the Complainant on the proper procedure to follow, the failure to do so does not constitute a breach of the law. The Ministry of Justice is the same arm of Government that has failed to “abide by its own constitutional obligations…” and it is only the courts that can order it to do so. By sending the writ to the Minister of Justice, the Complainant cannot claim they were attempting the exhaustion of domestic remedies as Article 56.5 requires the exhaustion of legal remedies and not administrative remedies. 71. As regards the argument that the communication reveals serious and massive violations of human rights, the African Commission would like to reiterate its earlier decisions in communication 12 13 14 Nos. 16/88 , 25/89, 47/90, 56/91, 100/93 and27/89, 46/91, 49/91, 99/93 that it […] cannot hold the requirement of exhaustion of local remedies to apply literally in cases where it is impractical or undesirable for the Complainant to seize the domestic courts in respect of each individual complaint. This is the case where there are a large number of victims. Due to the seriousness of the human rights situation and the large number of people involved, such remedies as might theoretically exist in the domestic courts are as a practical matter unavailable …” 72. However, as regards the continuous incommunicado detention of the detainees, the African Commission would like to note the State Party’s acknowledgement that the victims are still being held in detention because of the poor state of the criminal justice system in the country. With respect to this argument by the State Party, the African Commission notes that whenever there is a crime that can be investigated and prosecuted by the State on its own initiative, the State has the obligation to move the criminal process forward to its ultimate conclusion. In such cases, one cannot demand that the Complainants, or the victims or their family members assume the task of exhausting domestic remedies when it is up to the State to investigate the facts and bring the accused persons to court in accordance with both domestic and international fair trial standards. 73. The African Commission would also like to note that the State party has made a general refutation of the claims alleged and has insisted that domestic remedies do exist and that the Complainant did not attempt to exhaust them. The African Commission notes however, that the State party has merely listed in abstracto the existence of remedies without relating them to the circumstances of the case, and without showing how they might provide effective redress in the 15 circumstances of the case. 74. In the instant communication therefore, the fact that the Complainant has not sufficiently demonstrated that they have exhausted domestic remedies does not mean such remedies are available, effective and sufficient. The African Commission can infer from the circumstances surrounding the case and determine whether such remedies are in fact available, and if they are, whether they are effective and sufficient. 75. The invocation of the exception to the rule requiring that remedies under domestic law should be exhausted provided for inArticle 56.5 must invariably be linked to the determination of possible violations of certain rights enshrined in the African Charter, such as the right to a fair trial enshrined 16 under Article 7 of the African Charter. The exception to the rule on the exhaustion of domestic remedies would therefore apply where the domestic situation of the State does not afford due process of law for the protection of the right or rights that have allegedly been violated. In the present communication, this seems to be the case.