th 17. On 10 May 2006, the Secretariat of the African Commission received a letter from the Centre for Human Rights of the University of Pretoria submitting an amicus curiae brief. th 18. On 20 May 2006, the Secretariat received further submission on admissibility from the Respondent State. th 19. At its 39 Ordinary Session, the African Commission considered the communication and decided th to defer it to its 40 Ordinary Session. th 20. By Note Verbale and by letter dated 14 July 2006, the Secretariat notified both parties of the decision of the Commission and informed them that they can make further submission on admissibility if they so wished. rd 21. On 3 October 2006, the Secretariat received a fax from the Complainants forwarding a copy of a letter of appeal addressed by the victim to the President of the Republic of Botswana, and the response of the Senior Private Secretary to the President. th 22. On 4 October 2006, the Secretariat received the Complainants’ response to the Respondent State’s further submission on admissibility. th 23. On 7 November 2006, the Secretariat received a letter from the Respondent State requesting the Commission to purge the Complainants’ additional submissions from the record because the State was not invited to make additional submission. th th th 24. At its 40 Ordinary Session held in Banjul, The Gambia, from 15 to 29 November 2006, both parties were given audience before the Commission and the State requested to receive copy of the letter sent to the Complainants inviting further arguments, and to be given time to respond to the additional submissions made by the Complainants. st 25. The Commission decided to defer consideration of the communication to its 41 Ordinary Session and instructed the Secretariat to forward a copy of the above letter to the Respondent State. th 26. By Note Verbale dated 12 February 2007, the Secretariat forwarded the above letter to the Respondent State and requested the latter to submit its observation on the same. th 27. On 25 April 2007, the Secretariat received the response of the Respondent State on the Complainants’ further submissions. th 28. By Note Verbale dated 30 April 2007, the Secretariat acknowledged receipt of the Respondent State’s response. st 29. At its 41 Ordinary Session, the African Commission considered the communication and decided to declare it admissible. th 30. By Note Verbale of 20 June 2007 and letter of the same date, both parties were notified of the Commission’s decision. nd th 31. On 2 October 2007 and 10 October 2007, the Secretariat received the Complainants’ and Respondent State’s submissions on the merits, respectively. nd 32. By Note Verbale of 22 October 2007 and letter of the same date, the Secretariat acknowledged receipt of the Complainants’ and Respondent State’s submissions on the merits and forwarded each other’s submission to the other party. nd 33. At the 42 Ordinary Session the Secretariat received the Complainants’ response to the Respondent State’s submissions on the merits. nd 34. During the same 42 Ordinary Session, the Respondent State raised a preliminary objection on the procedure of the Commission and the Commission decided to defer the communication to allow the Secretariat prepare a decision on the preliminary objection. th 35. By Note Verbale of 19 December 2007 and letter of the same date, the Secretariat informed both parties of the Commission’s decision. th 36. At its 44 Ordinary Session, the Commission dismissed the Respondent State’s preliminary objections and requested that both parties submit within three months, their responses to the submissions of the other party. th 37. By Note Verbale of 5 January 2009 and letter of the same date, both parties were informed of the Commission’s decision and requested to make further submissions on the merits within three months. rd 38. On 3 February 2009, the Respondent State requested for a month extension of time to make further submissions on the merits.

Select target paragraph3