prima facie case exists, the African Commission only needs to be satisfied that the facts before it point to likelihood that a right protected in the African Charter has been violated. There is no requirement in the African Charter for evidence of systematic violations to be adduced for a prima facie case to exist. 36. Whether a national court has handed down a judgment in a matter is immaterial to the determination of the existence of a prima facie case before the African Commission. What matters is whether such judgment is in conformity with a state’s obligations under the African Charter. In assessing the compatibility of the ruling of a national court with the African Charter, the African Commission does not act as an appellate body with powers to overrule the decisions of national courts but simply discharges its mandate of ensuring compliance by a State Party, with the provisions of the African Charter in its interpretation and application of the law. 37. In the present Communication, the Complainants allege violations of specific articles of the African Charter, the provisions of which they deem the Kenyan Court of Appeal failed to take into consideration in their application of the law.8 Because the Communication specifically hinges on the interpretation and application of particular provisions of the African Charter with regards to the Victim’s case, the African Commission is satisfied that a prima facie case exists which it can determine without the necessity to require a systematic pattern of violations. likely occurred. See African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Information Sheet No 3: Communication Procedure 8 Complainants specifically allege violation of Articles 2, 3, 14 and 18(3) of the African Charter. 10