f. Are submitted within a reasonable time from the date local remedies were exhausted or from the date set by the Court as being the commencement of the time limit within which it shall be seised with the matter; and g. Do not deal with cases which have been settled by those States involved in accordance with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, or the Constitutive Act of African Union or the provisions of the Charter. 23. The Court notes that in the present case, the Respondent State raises an objection to admissibility based on non-exhaustion of local remedies. The Court will rule on this objection before examining other admissibility requirements, if necessary. A. Objection based on non-exhaustion of local remedies 24. The Respondent State asserts that the requirement of exhaustion of local remedies implies that before a case relating to human rights violations is brought before this Court, it must be first heard by all relevant courts in the domestic court system of the State concerned, in order to afford the latter the opportunity to remedy the alleged violation. The Respondent State maintains that before domestic courts, the Applicants raised neither the violations that they allege, nor the treaty provisions invoked. 25. The Respondent State submits that in the domestic proceedings preceding referral to this Court, the Applicants did not exhaust all available remedies, including the Court of Cassation. The Respondent State therefore prays the Court to declare the Application inadmissible for failure to exhaust local remedies. * 26. The Applicants, for their part, maintain that their Applications are admissible within the meaning of Article 56(5) of the Charter. They contend that they did not appeal to the Court of Cassation for reasons beyond their control. 8