15. On 4 May 2015, the Secretariat received correspondence (Note Verbale Ref: MOLS/020/15) from the Respondent State in which the Respondent State objected to the Commission’s decision on admissibility of the case. 16. On 13 May 2015, the Secretariat acknowledged receipt of the correspondence and informed the Respondent State that the matter would be brought to the attention of the Commission. 17. During its 18 Extra-Ordinary Session held from 21 July to 7 August 2015 in Nairobi, Kenya, the Commission considered the matter and decided to m the Complainant to make its observations on'the ir ing on the Preliminary same. alli) "y 19.On 24 August 2015, tnthd get Wy retariat acknowledged receipt and letter and Note Verbale dated 2 September 20. TheRespé ait‘iu, submits: ns ithe to the African Cha 7 ex in it it seeks the ooh sae roll a ee s decision on Admissibility is contrary violation of rights, involves the same parties, and & those sought in a case that has already been decided before the Commissiot) 4) 21. The Respondent State argues that the Complaint fails to comply with Article 56 (7) of the African Charter because a decision was delivered on the case and does not warrant re- litigation. 22. The Respondent State further argues that the decision does not adhere to the requirements of Article 117 of the Transitional Civil Procedure Code of Eritrea and that the case of Dawit Isaak is a matter of national security that should not be reviewed by the Commission.