-2382. In its Reply, the Applicant notes that it is difficult to establish the average duration of a case at the Cour de Cassation in Burkina Faso because the public has no easy access to such information. However, he concludes that relying on the information contained in expert reports, the average duration of a case on appeal in Burkina Faso may be between five (5) and nine (9) years. 83. The Applicant is of the view that the duration of four (4) years having been considered as unduly prolonged by the Commission and other international human rights institutions, his appeal in this case would have been unduly prolonged and therefore he stood a better chance before the African Court than before the Cour de Cassation. 84. The Court is of the view that since the alleged unduly prolonged procedure before the Cour de Cassation concerns only a remedy which has not been resorted to, the issue will be combined with the efficiency and sufficiency of remedies at the Cour de Cassation, which will be considered later. c). Availability, efficiency and sufficiency of remedies at the Cour de Cassation 85. In its Response, the Respondent State argues that the Applicant had not availed himself of all the local remedies at his disposal which might have enabled him to repair any alleged violations; he had therefore failed to provide Burkina Faso with the opportunity to repair the alleged violations, whereas such remedy did exist within the legal structures of Burkina Faso, by way of an appeal, as provided in Articles 567 to 598 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 86. Relying on the jurisprudence of the Commission in regard to the criteria of availability, effectiveness and sufficiency of remedies, the Respondent State maintains that in the instant case, the remedy exist, is effective and available, easily accessible and capable of repai~g the alleged viola!; It furl~:-- L; 23 /J ~ /Y/