32. The Complainant submits that this Communication is admissible under the African Charter, noting that the conditions under Article 56 are cumulative. The Complainant submits that this Communication clearly indicates that it is submitted by the Freedom and Justice Party of Egypt, in respect of the Victims sentenced to death. It states that the Communication includes full contact details for both the Complainant and its lawyers and that no question of anonymity arises. 33. The Complainant further states that the Communication is compatible with the African Charter because the facts contained within it are sufficient to demonstrate prima [acie violations of Articles 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the Charter. The Complainant submits that the Respondent State has been a Party to the African Charter since 1981 and that the matters addressed in the Communication occurred after the Charter became applicable in the territory of the Respondent State. 34. The Complainant submits that it is competent to bring the Communication, as there is nothing in the Charter to limit tlie definition of Complainant to persons who are victims of the alleged violations, and that the Commission has previously held in Maria Baes v Zaire' that the Complainant need not be a national of a State Party to the Charter to submit a Communication. 35. The Complainant respectfully submits that there-is nothing disparaging or insulting in the present Communication and that it records factua1 events. 36. In elation to the requirement that Communications shall be considered if they are not base exclusively on news disseminated through the mass media, the Complainant submits that in the jurisprudence of the Commission this requirement does not prevent Complainants from relying on any material drawn from the mass media, rather that it should not be exclusively based on mass media.> The Complainant submits that in the present case it does not have free access to the proceedings, and that even defense lawyers were barred from accessing the proceedings. Furthermore, the Complainant submits that it has had trouble communicating with lawyers and human rights activists in Egypt. 37. The Complainant, however, submits that the Communication is not exclusively based on news disseminated internationally Watch 4 5 and through recognized Amnesty the mass media, non-governmental International; and also organizations, statements of the draws such United on as reports Human Nations and from Rights other Communication 31/89 - Maria Baes v Zaire (1995) A C H P R . Communication 147 /95-149/96 - Sir Dowda K. Jawara v The Gambia (2000) ACHPR para 24. 7