separations are administrative procedural measures and not judicial measures and that they are dictated by the requirements of the procedure. 44. Citing Section 150 of the Cameroonian Criminal Procedure Code, the Respondent State argues that the examining magistrate is allowed to carry out all acts that he deems necessary for the discovery of the truth and that subsequent findings may warrant an extension of the initial charges. Moreover, the Respondent State submits that the separation measures were not personally targeted at the Complainant as they gave rise to other proceedings in which other people were indicted in connection with this particular case. 45. To justify the length of time taken by the examining magistrate to decide the case, the Respondent State submits that the Complainant’s allegations stem from a subjective assessment of the conduct of criminal investigation. To support this assertion, the Respondent State submits that 170 investigations were conducted between the first indictment and the interrogation and that after referral to the Court, the magistrate conducted 356 investigations relating to the remaining aspects between 29 July 2010 and 7 May 2012. The Respondent State further submits that at the time the Complainant was indicted, 438 cases were pending before the magistrate investigating his case, some of them involving people who had been detained for more than eighteen (18) months. 46. Still on the issue of the procedure being prolonged, the Respondent State argues that the situation was rather due to the Complainant’s refusal to respond to several warrants from the magistrate. The Respondent State is satisfied that in less than four (4) years of proceedings, such a complex case has been able to go through three stages: judicial investigation, trial at first instance and trial on appeal. 11