d. The Complainants confirm that they have exhausted local remedies. The execution of their client, Mr Oteng Modisane Ping, on 1 April 2006 was based on the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Botswana dated 26 January 2006.3 The Court of Appeal is the highest Judicial Authority in the Country, from which there are no other avenues of Appeal; e. The Communication was submitted to the Commission on 31 March 2006, that is, 3 months and 5 days after their client’s appeal before the Court of Appeal was dismissed. f. The Communication has not been submitted to any other procedure of international investigation or settlement. 26. For the reasons stated above, the Complainants submitted that the Commission should declare the present Communication admissible. The Respondent State’s Submissions on Admissibility 27. The Respondent State failed to respond to the Commission’s request to make submissions on the Admissibility of the Communication, within the stipulated time, despite several reminders. 28. Therefore, in line with Rule 117(2), the Respondent State had been given the opportunity to submit its own observations and information on the Admissibility of the Communication but failed to do so. The Commission’s Decision on Admissibility 29. Rule 117(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission provides that: “the Commission...may request the State Party concerned...to submit in writing additional information or observations relating to the issue of admissibility of the Communication. The Commission...shall fix a time limit for the submission of the information or observations to avoid the issue dragging on too long”. Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal No 045 of 2005, Judgment Oteng Modisane PING v. The State, 26 January 2006 3 9|P a g e