3. Deploy an investigation mission with a view to observing in loco the accusations made against Burundi, Rwanda and Uganda; 4. Demand the unconditional withdrawal of the invading troops from Congolese territory in order to put an end to the grave and massive violations of human rights; 5. Demand that the countries violating human and peoples' rights in the Democratic Republic of Congo pay just reparation for the damages caused and the acts of looting; and 6. Indicate the appropriate measures to punish the authors of the war crimes or crimes against humanity, as the case may be, and the creation of an ad hoc tribunal to try the crimes committed against the Democratic Republic of Congo. The ad hoc tribunal may be created in collaboration with the [UN]". Procedure 12. The communication was received at the Secretariat of the [African] Commission on 8th March 1999. The same day, two letters were dispatched by fax, to the Ministry of Human Rights and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Democratic Republic of Congo respectively, acknowledging receipt. 13. In compliance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and the Rules of Procedure, the Secretariat then submitted the communication to the [African] Commission, meeting at its 25th Ordinary Session from 26th April to 5th May 1999, in Bujumbura (Burundi). 14. At its 25th Ordinary session held in Bujumbura, Burundi, the [African] Commission took a decision of seizure on the communication and requested the Complainant State to forward an official copy of its complaint to the Secretary-General of the OAU. 15. On 28th May 1999, Notes Verbale together with a copy of the communication were each sent to the Ministries of External Affairs/External Relations of the Respondent States informing them of the communication filed against them by the Democratic Republic of Congo. 16. On 2nd June 1999, the Secretariat wrote to the authorities of the Democratic Republic of Congo informing them of the decision of seizure taken by the [African] Commission and requesting them to comply with the provisions of Article 49 of the Charter. 17. At the 26th Session of the [African] Commission held in Kigali, Rwanda, the communication was not examined, as the [African] Commission considered it necessary to allow the Respondent States more time to communicate their reactions. 18. On 14th December 1999, the Secretariat wrote to the various parties requesting their reactions regarding the issue of admissibility. 19. At the 27th Ordinary Session held from 27th April to 11th May 2000 in Algiers, Algeria, the [African] Commission heard oral submissions on the admissibility of the case from representatives of the Complainant State and from two Respondent States (Rwanda and Uganda). The [African] Commission, after examining the case according to the provisions of its Rules of Procedures, thereafter declared the communication admissible and requested parties to furnish it with arguments on the merits of the case. 20. The parties were accordingly informed of the above decision on 14th July 2000. 21. At the 28th Session of the [African] Commission held from 23rd October to 6th November 2000 in Cotonou, Benin, the communication was not considered as the [African] Commission had not received any response from Respondent States on the request that was extended to them following the 27th Session. 22. During the Session, however, the delegation of Rwanda transmitted to the Secretariat of the [African] Commission, a submission, which stated that the [African] Commission should not have declared communication 227/99 admissible because the procedure followed by the Democratic Republic of Congo was not valid and that the [African] Commission itself had not respected the provisions of its own Rules of Procedure. The submission further stated that the matters addressed by the communication were pending before competent authorities of the Organisation of African Unity and other international bodies like the UN Security Council and ECOSOC. Finally, Rwanda refuted allegations of human rights violations made against it by the Democratic Republic of Congo and justified the presence of its troops in this country on grounds of security, while accusing the Democratic Republic of Congo of hosting groups hostile to Rwanda. 23. The submission of Rwanda was transmitted to all States concerned with communication 227/99. 24. In October 2000, the Secretariat of the [African] Commission received from Uganda a submission on communication 227/99 in which the Respondent State recognised and justified the presence of its troops in 3