(c) Are not written in disparaging or insulting language directed against the State concerned and its institutions or to the African Union; (d) Are not based exclusively on news disseminated through the mass media, (e) Are sent after exhausting local remedies, if any, unless it is obvious that this procedure is unduly prolonged; (f) Are submitted within a reasonable time from the date the local remedies were exhausted or from the date set by the Court as being the commencement of the time limit within which is shall be seized with the matter; (g) Do not deal with cases which have been settled by those States involved in accordance with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, or the Constitutive Act of the African Union or the provisions of the Charter. *** 33. The Respondent State raises an objection based on non-exhaustion of local remedies on which the Court will rule before examining other admissibility requirements, if necessary. i. Objection based on non-exhaustion of local remedies 34. The Respondent State asserts that the requirement of exhaustion of local remedies aims to prevent international human rights courts from acting as trial courts but, rather, contribute to strengthening complementarity and the principle of subsidiarity. 35. The Respondent State further alleges that its laws are unique insofar as they entrust the Constitutional Court with jurisdiction to adjudicate matters of human rights violations, as set out in Article 117 of Law No. 2019-40 of 7 November 2019 amending Law No. 90-32 of 11 December 1990 on the Constitution. 10