him with a mention Notice and that the Deputy Registrar also did not issue a mention Notice for him to attend court on 02 November 2012. However, the mention did not take place on 02 November 2012, and the Complainant submits that the case was instead listed on 05 November 2012, again without his knowledge. The Complainant further submits that upon ex parte hearing of the Respondents on 05 November 2012, Justice Ngugi issued a further mention date for 19 November 2012 which the Respondents also failed to serve on the Complainant, again resulting in his absence. . The Complainant claims that on 19 November 2012 Justice Ngugi arbitrarily directed that the Complainant should come to court on 03,Deceittber 2012 to explain why the petition should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. The Justice instructed the Deputy Registrar to give notice of this to the Comtijjainant and while the notice was constitutional petition,and without first satisfyin, herself that the notice to show case dated 20 November 2012 had been properly served on the Complainant. . The Complainant submits that, aggrieved by this decision, he filed the Notice of Motion dated 29 July 2013 seeking the interventionof the High Court to set aside the ex parte orders of 03 December 2012 and re-admit the constitutional petition. This Notice.of Motion was dismissed on 17 October 2013. Thereupon the Complainant lodged civil appeal No. 337 of 2013, civil appeal No. 339 of 2013 and civil application No. NAI 807 of 2013 in the’Kenyan Court of Appeal in November 2013 with the aim of overturning the “dismissal orders of 03 December 2012 and 17 October 2013, restoring the original 08 June 2012 constitutional petition to a hearing on merits and staying the criminal proceedings emanating from the decision of the Business Premises Tribunal. These civil appeals and application were still pending undetermined by the Court of Appeal at the time of the submission of this Complaint to the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (the Commission). . The Complainant avers that the Respondent State curtailed the provisions of the African Charter by permitting Justice Ngugi to dismiss the aforesaid constitutional petition, thereby exposing the Victims to unlawful arrest, criminal prosecution and loss of business arising out of the orders of the Business Premises Rent Tribunal in case No. 806 of 2011. The Complainant further avers that these violations are exacerbated by the undue delay of the Court of Appeal to set-down the above mentioned civil appeals for urgent hearings and disposal.