34. The Applicant did not respond to this objection. *** 35. The Court notes that pursuant to Article 56(5) of the Charter, whose provisions are restated in Rule 50(2)(e) of the Rules, any application filed before it shall fulfil the requirement of exhaustion of local remedies. As regards the remedies to be exhausted, the Court has held in its previous judgments that they must be ordinary.10 36. As regards the Respondent State, the Court has in a number of its judgements also held that Applicants are not obliged to bring a constitutional challenge before the Court for violation of fundamental rights, as the Court has ruled that the said remedy is an extraordinary remedy.11 In line with the Court’s decision, the Applicant is deemed to have exhausted local remedies once the he has pursued his case through the judicial system, up to the Court of Appeal, which is the highest court of the country.12 37. The Court notes that in the instant case, the Applicant’s appeal was decided by the Court of Appeal’s judgement of 30 November 2015. As the constitutional challenge in the Respondent State’s judicial system is considered by this Court as an extraordinary remedy that the Applicant is not bound to exercise, the Court considers that local remedies were exhausted in the instant matter. 38. In view of the foregoing, the Court holds that the Applicant exhausted the local remedies provided for in Article 56(5) of the Charter and Rule 50(2)(e) 10 Laurent Munyandikiwa v. Republic of Rwanda, ACtHPR, Application No. 023/2015, Judgment of 2 December 2021, § 74; Alex Thomas v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits), (20 November 2015) 1 AfCLR 465, § 64. 11 Gozbert Henrico v. United Republic of Tanzania, ACtHPR, Application No. 056/2016, Judgment of 10 January 2022, § 61; Mgosi Mwita Makungu v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits) (7 December 2018) 2 AfCLR 550, § 46; Mohamed Abubakari v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits) (3 June 2016) 1 AfCLR 599, §§ 66-70; Thomas v. Tanzania (merits), § 63-65. 12 Hamis Shaban aka Hamis Ustadh v. United Republic of Tanzania, ACtHPR, Application No. 026/2015, Judgment of 2 December 2021, § 51; Abubakari v. Tanzania (merits), § 76. 10