67. This kind of remedy is purely discretionary and even worse is not subject to judicial oversight and hence is final. In several instances, the Commission has made its position clear that when a remedy is discretionary, extraordinary remedy of a non-judicial nature, then the Complainants are not required to pursue it as part of the requirement of exhaustion of local remedies. 68. For instance in two cases against Nigeria, the Commission ruled that when the remedy is discretionary extraordinary remedy of a nonjudicial nature It would be improper to insist on the Complainant seeking remedies from a source which does not operate impartially and have no obligation to decide according to legal principles. The remedy is neither adequate nor effective 21 . 69. In line with the above reasoning, the Commission finds that the remedies that the Respondent State claims to be available to the Complainants under the NISS Act and Criminal Act of 1991 are inadequate and ineffective. 70. Having found that domestic remedies were not accessible to the Complainants or their representatives, and that local remedies were not adequate and effective, it would be an affront to justice to expect them or anyone else for that matter to approach the Constitutional Court for the later to protect their right to litigation as enshrined under Article 35 of the 2005 Interim National Constitution of Sudan. 71. The African Commission therefore holds that in the present Communication the local remedies in Sudan were not available, effective and sufficient to the complainants and hence the Complainants have constructively exhausted local remedies pursuant to Article 56(5) of the African Charter. Decision of the African Commission on Admissibility 72 . In view of the above, the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights declares this Communication Admissible in accordance with Article 56 of the African Charter. Merits The Complainants' Submissions on the Merits 73. The Complainants submit that the facts of the Communication reveal violations of a number of human rights guaranteed in the African Charter, namely: the right to dignity and to freedom from torture and ill-treatment ( Article 5 ); the right to liberty and security ( Article 6 ); the right to a fair trial ( Article 7 ); the right to freedom of information and freedom of expression ( Article 9 ); the right to freedom of association ( Article 10 ); the right to freedom of movement ( Article 12(1) , (2) ); the right to work ( Article 15 ); the right to health ( Article 16 ); and the right to legal protection of the rights guaranteed in the African Charter ( Article 1 ). Alleged Violation of Article 5 74. The complainants submit that they were subjected to a series of acts that, singly and in combination, caused severe physical and mental pain and suffering inflicted by officials with the purpose of extracting information and inflicting punishment, which amounted to torture. 75. It is submitted that Mr. Amir Monim Elgak and Mr. Osman Hummeida were subjected to sustained and severe beatings. The Complainants describe various acts to which they were subjected, including being punched and hit with a pipe and wooden cane on their feet and soles. Mr. Osman Hummeida in particular was allegedly subjected to sleep deprivation and denied access to medical treatment. It is submitted that 9