iii. Putting in place laws mentioned above which PWA can rely on to seek redress for alleged violations. 74. The Respondent State argues, that other than the public interest litigation avenue, the Applicants could have also provided legal assistance to the affected PWA for them to seek redress at the national courts, but they did not. 75. The Applicants argue that the Respondent State has failed to provide effective or sufficient remedies to PWA who are victims of alleged violations of human rights. In this regard, the Applicants aver that the Respondent State has not conducted effective investigations and prosecution with due diligence in cases involving PWA. 76. The Applicants especially aver that many criminal cases related to the attack of PWA have been dismissed through the entry of nolle prosequi by the prosecutors of the Respondent State. 77. Referencing the Commission’s communication of Anuak Justice Council v. Ethiopia, the Applicants argue further, that in instances of widespread violations of human rights, the state is presumed to have notice of the alleged violations and is expected to resolve the same. In such an instance, the requirement of exhaustion of local remedies is dispensed with. *** 78. The Court has already noted that the essence of the rule of exhaustion of local remedies is to provide states, the opportunity to resolve cases of alleged human rights violations within their jurisdiction before an international human rights body is called upon to determine the state’s responsibility for the same.21 African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights v. Republic of Kenya (merits) (26 May 2017) 2 AfCLR 9, §§ 93-94. 21 20