between the exhaustion of local remedies and submission of the Complaint to the Commission qualifies as a reasonable time period. 66. In this regard, the Commission notes that the African Charter does not provide for what constitutes a reasonable period. In its jurisprudence, the Commission has held that; “Going by the practice of similar regional human rights instruments, such as the Inter-American Commission and Court and the European Court, six months seem to be the usual standard. This notwithstanding, each case must be treated on its own merit.”13 67. In Communication 310/05: Darfur Relief and Documentation Centre v. Sudan, which was submitted to the Commission 2 years and 5 months after exhausting local remedies, the Commission reasoned that “there is no sufficient reason given as to why the Communication could not be submitted within a reasonable period, and therefore declared the Communication inadmissible.”14 68. In the present Communication, the Complainant stated that Article 56(6) had been complied with, as noted in Paragraph 25 above, however did not provide any substantiating evidence for this assertion. 69. Relying on the above jurisprudence, the Commission holds that the period of ‘three years, one month and fifteen days‘ of delay in the present Communication cannot be considered as a reasonable time period, in light of the fact that no explanation has been given by the Complainant justifying the delay. Accordingly, the Commission finds that the Communication does not fulfill Article 56(6) of the African Charter. 70. In relation to Article 56(7) of the African Charter, neither the Complainant nor the Respondent State provided submissions or evidence on whether the issues and claims in the Communication have been brought before, or settled by another international forum. However, in light of the fact that the Commission does not find evidence which indicates that the issues and claims have been brought before, or settled, by any other international forum. Accordingly, the Commission finds that Article 56(7) of the African Charter has been satisfied. Decision of the African Commission on Admissibility 71. In view of the above, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights decides: i. 13 14 To declare the Communication inadmissible for failure to comply with Article 56(6) of the African Charter; Communication 308/05 Michael Majuru v. Zimbabwe (2008) ACHPR, para.109 Communication 310/05: Darfur Relief and Documentation Centre v. Sudan (2009) ACHPR, para.76 10