that the Communication be tabled for admissibility on a priority basis during the 18th Extra-Ordinary Session. The Law on Admissibility Complainants' Submissions on Admissibility 38. The Complainants submitted that they have fulfilled all the requirements Admissibility provided under Article 56 of the African Charter. of 39. The Complainants submitted that the Communication: indicates the authors; is compatible with the African Union Constitutive Act and the African Charter; is not written in disparaging or insulting language; is not based exclusively on news disseminated through the mass media; is submitted within a reasonable period of time; and does not deal with a case that has been settled internationally or regionally. The Complainants further submitted that the Communication satisfies the requirement of Article 56(5) of the African Charter on the exhaustion of local remedies since the remedies are unavailable, inefficient and insufficient. 40. The Complainants submitted that the requirement to exhaust local remedies is underpinned by several considerations as follows: local remedies must be judicial in nature; the pursuit of local remedies must guarantee a genuine prospect of success; the violations must be justiciable at the national level; fair trial guarantees must be observed; and exemption should be considered in cases where the scale or seriousness of violations renders it impractical to claim local remedies at the national level. 41. The Complainants submitted that they are unable to challenge Government's laws and actions because of deficits contained in the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (the Constitution) and other organic laws. The Complainants further submitted that local remedies are unavailable since the powers to adjudicate constitutional issues are given to a non-judicial or political organ by the Constitution and other laws. In this regard, courts are legally and effectively prohibited from interpreting and applying the Constitution and other international treaties ratified by Ethiopia including the African Charter. The Complainants rely on Cudjoe v Ghana? where the Commission held that Article 56 of the Charter" entails remedy sought from courts of a judicial nature". 42. The Complainants submitted that the requirement that local remedies must be judicial in nature is a 'common African Standard'. The Complainants further submitted that the power to interpret the Constitution is usually given to a judicial organ of the State and any other arrangement will therefore violate the principle of separation of powers that is necessary for the independence of courts.' 43. The Complainants submitted that Articles 62, 83 and 84 of Ethiopia's Constitution bestows the power to interpret the Constitution or decide on any constitutional dispute to the House of the Federation - the upper House of Parliament - therefore it ~ of the requirement that the exhaustion of local remedy should be of a judicial natur ~ The Complainants further submitted that I/[t]he House of the Federatio .G not jt,{"stthe"-o.o<,..' '" Communication 221/98 - Cudjoe v. Ghana (1999) ACHPR para 13. 3 Communication 251/02 - Human Rights v. Swaziland (2005) ACHPR paras 55-56. 2 c- I( ~ ~ ~ \.. J' ..Ill": p..U·\)'" "'- ~~'"~ ~<s--"-S'UIy Q !t' ~ <:' 9,... MRl(.I-'~' <,,<-" /' ~/