118. The Commission
observes that, following the above demonstration,
a generalized
atmosphere of instability and fear of persecution can be detected in the Southern region of
Cameroon between the moment the alleged violations started and the present time. In such
environments and specific circumstances, the very same citizens whose lives are said to be
in such danger would naturally be impeded to seek protection from the authorities who
have allegedly been identified as perpetrators of the said violations. The Commission
therefore holds that, in such circumstances, remedies are deemed to be unavailable.P
119. In light of the above, the Commission observes that lack of availability of remedies would
automatically
imply absence of effectiveness
and sufficiency. In conclusion,
the
Commission finds that the conditions of Article 56 (5) have been satisfied.
Submission
within a reasonable
period (Article 56(6))
120. Article 56(6) of the Charter requires that COIllqlUll~~atio:t;l~.~;re "submitteq'~i.!;'rithin a
reasonable period from the lime local remedies an>i: exhaU:st~d or from the date the
Commission is seized of the matter". The principle herewith est~blished by the Charter is
dependent
upon the requirements
provided for in number five" (5) of article 56.
Considering that local remedies were deemed not available, based on the Commission's
analysis, the reasonable period factor do~~ not apply. Therefore, the Commission finds that
the conditions of Article 56 (6) have been satisfied by default.
Previously
settled matters (Article 5~ (7))
, ,~.\'iV'
121. Article 56(7) of the Charter requires that Communications shall only be considered if they
do not deal with cases which have been settled by these States involved in accordance
with the principles of the Charter of the 1Jnited Nations, or the Charter of the Organization
of African Unity or the provisions of . the pt~~ent
Charter".
,~.
II
,\}'
122. The Commission's position on the above principle has been well elaborated and elucidated
in its jurisprudence with regards to two main conditions. On one side, with regards to the
nature
the orgap.isation; the.Commission understands that Article 56(7) is not satisfied
if the saIne Compl~ntis
submitted to a Human Rights bodyt? for consideration. On the
other side, as regards the nature of the decision, the Commission understands that the body
must "take a decision that addresses the concerns, including the remedy sought by the
complainant ... [and that] it is not sufficient that the matter is simply discus ~Nt;be"e
~rI
NO'
bodies't.P
~ 0 ~\,:-\ARI4r ,0(<.-
ef
~o ,?«.-G
...._
:?
"
123. This implies that where the complainant submits a complaint to the Co ;::mis iOf~rp,~ tIt~ '_ .
complaint has already been submitted to another body with a human; ~ht mii~(1.~e, i1:i ~,
automatically renders the complaint inadmissible. Furthermore, whe ""1h~, mpla'ffta
'"
.. t.
'~
18
Communication 318/06 - Open Society Justice Initiative \I. Cote d'tvoire,
.blttts.;.llw.wy:!.&.QJl.pr~JgL.s_e.s,SlQD_sj_d~e..s..cJ.owns.l_tQ.::22.8.
,
U's,
C
~<;j
ONA"RICp..\~
' -..::-'fOMME
tS-t;} '
!v
'1?,.,
Q~
V
'?t;;;
Ei O\':-'" "
~~)o.~=-...__
__ ~,._-
Communication 279/03-296/05 - Sudan Human Rights Organisation & Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions
(COHRE) v Sudan (2009) paras 104, 105, ~LQfgL~e..s__slQns/desciQIls_7..Lct::.19.Q
20 Communication 301/05 - Haregewoin Gabre-Selassie and IHRDA (on behalf of former Dergue Officials) v Ethiopia
(2013) ACHPR, para 117, https:ilwww.acllPL_Q[g/sessions/.de_sciQos?id=242
19
20