ACH PR African Commission on Human Rights our Human ancl Peoples· l'{ights Collective F�esponsibilitv obstruction claim and how it hindered him from pursuing the available local remedies. 56. In reference to the ruling of the Vetting Board, the Commission recalls its previous decision in the cases of Peter Odiwuor Ngoge v Republic ofKenya and Peter Odiwuor Ngoge and Joseph Njau v Republic of Kenya.7 In these Communications, the Commission determined that the Supreme Court's decision concerning the Vetting Board does not preclude the Complainant from pursuing domestic cases in local courts. The Commission emphasized that the findings of the Vetting Board and the Complainant's domestic cases are distinct from each other. 57. Hence, consistent with its established jurisprudence, the Commission affirms that the contention regarding the obstruction of justice and the decision of the Vetting Board does not exempt the Complainant from the requirement to exhaust domestic remedies. 58. The Complainant also asserts that the local remedies were unreasonably prolonged, as supported by the High Court's Certificate of Delay, which hindered the exhaustion of domestic remedies. 59. According to Article 56(5) of the African Charter, while there are exceptions to the exhaustion requirement, such as when domestic remedies are inaccessible, ineffective, or unduly prolonged, the general rule remains that complainants should make a genuine effort to exhaust local remedies before seeking international recourse. This approach encourages individuals to engage with domestic mechanisms, fostering dialogue and facilitating the resolution of human rights issues within their countries. 60. Although the Commission lacks standardized criteria for determining undue prolongation, it evaluates each case individually. The Commission has also relied on the common law principle of "reasonable person's standard," which serves as a benchmark to assess whether the duration of a delay in resolving a legal matter is reasonable from an objective standpoint. It consi factors and circumstances surrounding the delay, including the 1i� • O I V "' 0 � 7 Communications 485/14 -Peter Odiwuor Ngoge v Republic of Kenya and 535/1 5 - Peter Odiwuor Ngoge an v Republic of Kenya, paras 67 and 68 q� Afriqan 1, union \--,-.r,,':I. An o,gan of lt1e 12 African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights 31 Bijilo Annex Layout, Kombo North District, West Coast Region, The Gambia Phone: (220) 230 4361 Fax: (220) 441 OS 04 Email: au-banjul@africa-union.org