African Commission should not entertain the case as doing so will certainly interfere with the jurisdictional sovereignty of Ethiopia. 47. Finally, the Respondent State request for the Communication to be declared Inadmissible on the grounds that the Applicants failed to comply with the requirements under Article 56(2) and 56(5) of the African Charter. Complainant’s Additional Submission on Admissibility 48. The Complainant responded to the Respondent State‟s submissions on the compatibility of the Communication with the African Charter and to the Respondent‟s State‟s assertions that the Applicants‟ have failed to exhaust local remedies. 49. The Complainant argues that the Respondent State‟s argument that the issues at the heart of this matter should not be considered by the African Commission but by the Respondent State‟s courts is flawed. Firstly, Article 45 of the African Charter does not enumerate classes of cases that the African Commission is mandated to consider, it provides a general outline of its role. Relevantly, this includes to “[e]nsure the protection of human and peoples' rights under conditions laid down by the present African Charter” (Article 45 (2)). Secondly, the African Charter protects the fair trial guarantees, the right to property and the independence of the judiciary which goes to the heart of the universality of human rights. Where policies or practices impinge on rights protected in the African Charter, the compliance with these policies or practices with the African Charter can be evaluated by the African Commission. The inclusion of these articles of the African Charter – which deals specifically with alleged violations 13