the Melaku Fenta and others case was dealt with within two weeks thus showing that the judiciary has no functional independence and that the above scenario was' coordinated and centrally managed by the government.' 94. The Complainants submit that other similar applications, including the right to be presumed innocent by the Complainants, have been thrown out by the Ethiopian Federal Supreme Court and that they have no further opportunity of appeal. 95. The Complainants submit that they have met the requirement of the exhaustion of local remedies in light of the above facts. The African Commission's 96. Analysis on Admissibility Article 56 of the African Charter sets out seven requirements that a Communication brought under Article 55 of the African Charter must satisfy in order to be declared Admissible for consideration by the Commission. Those requirements apply conjunctively and cumulatively.w Failure to satisfy anyone or more of those requirements renders the Communication inadmissible, unless the Complainant provides sufficient justifications as to why any of the requirements could not be met."? 97. In the present Communication, the Complainants submit that all the requirements under Article 56 of the African Charter have been complied with. The Respondent State on its part however submitted that the Complainants have not satisfied all the requirements as stipulated under Article 56 of the African Charter and in particular the exhaustion of local remedies requirement under Article 56(5) thereunder. 98. In light of the general objection from the Respondent State that the Communication does not comply with the requirement stipulated under Article 56 of the African Charter, it is therefore necessary to evaluate whether all the requirements on Admissibility have been satisfied by the Complainants including the requirement to exhaust local remedies under Article 56(5) thereof. 99. To begin with, Article 56(1) of the African Charter requires that the Communication should' [iJndicate their authors even if the latter requests anonymity.' This requirement demands that those submitting Communications must be known to the Commission. In this regard, the provision allows for the authors' names to be kept anonymous. In this Communication, the authors requested their details to be kept confidential, which request was granted. To this extent, this requirement has been satisfied. 100. Article 56(2) of the African Charter requires that the Communication should be compatible with the Constitutive Act of the African Union and the African Charter. In Kevin Mgwaga Gunme et. al. v Cameroon the Commission listed the conditions necessary for the compatibility, namely the Communication should: be brought against a State Party to the African Charter; allege a prima facie violations of the African Charter; brought in respect of violations that occurred after State's ratification of the African Charter, or where violations began before the State Party ratified the African Charter have continued even after such ratification.!" Using the above criteria, th~. <> • " "0";'\ (". 'f!_'" 16Rule 106, Rules of Procedure of the Commission, 2010; Communication 304/05 - FIOI-!' ~ Others v Senegal (2006) ACHPR. 8 I ~ Communication No. 275/2003 - Article 19 vs. Eritrea (2007) ACHPR. ~'5 ~ p..\l'I.),f>. 18 Communication No. 266/03 - Kevin Mgwaga Gunme et. al. v. Cameroon (2009) ACHPR, pa ~-.r-1. \...' .., ~", l "j g- , ~ 17 .... , ~,_'-- - Si " (Jty "" .., ,. ~4.• 9. ",.,ue, p.~ t/<"::>" . ~-,- ()fo !<-'" o 1... ,~~ MMEE~ : t*-'" /' .. "