40. Relying on the Decision of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights in Communication Dawda K. Jawara versus the Republic of The Gambia (Communication No. 147/95-149/96), the Applicants submit that the remedy proposed by the Respondent is neither effective nor sufficient and that, the undue prolongation of local procedures provides justification for the Court to declare their Application admissible. 41.As the Court underscored in its previous judgments, the rule regarding the exhaustion of local remedies prior to referral to an international human rights Court is one that is recognized and accepted internationally1 42. It is clear from the records that the Applicants do not contest that they have not used the totality of the judicial remedies existing in the Respondent State's system. What is in contention between the Parties is, on the one hand, the question as to whether the duration of the procedure at national level has been unduly prolonged within the meaning of Article 56 (5) of the Charter and Rule 40 (5) of the Rules; and, on the other, the question as to whether referral to the investigating judge is, in the judicial system of the Respondent State, a remedy that is available, effective and sufficient. 43. Whereas the Respondent contends that the procedure was stalled because the Police was unable to apprehend the perpetrator(s) of the robbery, the Applicants, for their part, maintain that the author of the robbery was identified, but that the Police and Office of the State Attorney did not take steps to close the case at their level. 44. The question that arises at this juncture is whether there exists in the Respondent's judicial system a remedy that the Applicants could have 1 Application 004/2013, LoM Issa Konate v. Burkina Faso (Preliminary Objections), Judgment of 5 December 2014, paragraph 78 9