case concerning him, either directly by himself or by the diligence of that court; The Applicants brought an action before the Constitutional Council against a law that had already been enacted, in the absence of any proceedings pending before a court. 39. The Court notes that the Applicants underscored that they exhausted all local remedies to prevent the adoption and implementation of Law No. 0342020/AN of 25 August 2020. 40. In support of this claim, the Applicants state that they addressed a petition co-signed by other political actors to Members of Parliament requesting that the bill be rejected for being illegal in its form and substance. They further aver that on 16 September 2020, they lodged a petition with the Constitutional Council challenging Law No. 034-2020/AN of 25 August 2020. Finally, the Applicants maintain that they exhausted the remedies insofar as they held a press conference on 29 September 2020 to inform the national and international public opinion of their citizen initiative. 41. The Court notes that, in accordance with Article 56(5) of the Charter and Rule 50(2) (e) of the Rules, Applications must be filed after exhaustion of local remedies if any, unless it is clear that the proceedings in respect of such remedies are unduly prolonged.6 42. The Court recalls, in line with its consistent case-law, that the local remedies to be exhausted must be available, effective and satisfactory. Moreover, the mere fact that a remedy exists does not satisfy the rule of exhaustion of remedies since an Applicant is only required to exhaust a remedy insofar as it offers prospects of success.7 6 Andrew Ambrose Cheusi v. Republic of Tanzania (merits and reparations) (26 June 2020) 4 AfCLR 219, §52. 7 Norbert Zongo and Others v. Burkina Faso (merits) (28 March 2014) 1 AfCLR 219, § 68; Lohé Issa Konaté v. Burkina Faso (merits) (5 December 2014) 1 AfCLR 314, §§ 92 and 108; Sébastien Germain Marie Akoué Ajavon v. Republic of Benin (merits and reparations) (4 December 2020) 4 AfCLR 133, § 99. 10