53. In response to the Respondent States submission on the exhaustion of local remedies, the Complainant argues that the remedies which the Respondent State argues that they should have pursued failed to meet the standard for an effective remedy in international and regional human rights law. Article 56 (5) of the African Charter provides that Communications shall be considered if they are sent after exhausting local remedies, if any, unless it is obvious that this procedure is unduly prolonged7‟. In determining this rule the African Commission has stated that “the remedy must be available, effective and sufficient8”. The African Commission has observed that a “remedy is considered available if the petitioner can pursue it without impediment; it is deemed effective if it offers a prospect of success, and it is found sufficient if it is capable of redressing the complaint9”. 54. The Complainant further argues that international and regional human rights law requires that for a domestic remedy to be exhausted, it must be available, effective and sufficient. This means that the particular remedy must not only be available in theory but also in practice and must have a reasonable prospect of success10. The European Court on Human Rights has held that to uphold objections based on failure to exhaust local remedies, the remedies must be both formally available and sufficiently certain in theory as well as in practice failing which they will lack the requisite accessibility and effectiveness11.The InterAmerican Court on Human Rights has opined that remedies should be exhausted when they exist formally, where they are adequate to protect the legal 7Article 56 (5) of the African Charter, http://www.achpr.org/english/_info/charter_en.html, accessed 13 July 2011. 8Dawda Jawara v The Gambia (Communications 147/95 and 149/96), para 31. 9 Ibid,para 32. 10 Collins v Jamaica Communication UN Human Rights Committee, No. 356/1989, para 7.1. 11 Pavletic v Slovakia App. No. 39359/98, June 22, 2004, para 68. 15