109. Lastly, the Respondent State introduces the affidavit of the Director General of National Security of Djibouti to underscore that its SOFA Agreement with the U.S. Government in respect of use of Camp Lamonnier is consistent with standard practice for such agreements between states and the United Nations and states inter se. Similarly the SOFA contains standard diplomatic immunities. In this connection it argues that even if the Complainant could for argument’s sake be deemed to have been detained at Camp Lamonnier, such detention was without its knowledge or involvement as Camp Lamonnier was inviolate under the SOFA Agreement and international law on diplomatic relations. Accordingly, so it submits, there is no prima facie case that Djibouti was complicit in the alleged violations by a third state. 110. Moreover, it reiterates, the Commission must desist from considering this Communication on the merits because it would, contrary to international law, inescapably have to examine the propriety of the conduct of a third state which is and cannot be a party to this Communication. Accordingly the Respondent State reiterates that the present Communication must be declared inadmissible. 7. Complainant’s ‘Final’ Response on Admissibility 111. The Complainant submitted further observations and the Commission allowed them taking into account that the Respondent State had introduced anew a second affidavit of its Chief Prosecutor, an affidavit of the Director General of National Security, and a satellite image of its Ambouli International Airport. 112. In his further submissions, the Complainant raised the objections determined above (see paragraphs 55 to 66). 113. Further, regarding the three sets of evidence introduced by the Respondent State in its Reply on Admissibility, the Complainant observes first that determination of whether there is sufficient evidence to show that the Complainant was in Djibouti is a matter for the merits stage. For the present purposes, he insists that the evidence presented ranging from his own testimony; the record of habeas corpus proceedings in Tanzania; reports of international organisations; the Affidavits of three experts on the alleged U.S. Government’s rendition program all prove that Camp Lamonnier was routinely used for detention and a transit for rendition flights. He maintains that the said evidence also places him in Djibouti for approximately two weeks. 114. Other than the above, the Complainant also observes that the affidavit of the Director General of National Security establishes that even though Camp Lamonnier 21