-26i). Availability of remedy at the Cour de Cassation 96. The Court shares the view of the Commission that a remedy is available if it can be pursued by the Applicant without any impediment. 8 97. In the instant case, the Respondent State argues that the Applicant cannot rely on the fact that the five day period was short as a reason for refraining from appealing to the Cour de Cassation whereas this could have been done by way of a simple declaration and that consequently, the argument on the unavailability of court judgments and the brevity of the time limit for appealing to the Cour de Cassation would not be sufficient reason for failing to exhaust that local remedy. He points out that the only obligation which the Applicant has is to deposit or request to be deposited within a period of two (2) months following his declaration of appeal, a submission to the Registry of the jurisdiction where the appeal was filed. 98. The Applicant submits that he has not appealed to the Cour de Cassation because the five-day deadline for such appeals under the Burkinabe judicial system is unreasonably short, especially as he did not have the complete text of the judgment on which he could have relied in his appeal. He contends that the unreasonably short time limit rendered the process ineffective. He further contends that a remedy not mentioned in the reasons or grounds of appeal may not be raised subsequently, hence the importance of having the judgement. 99. In the view of the Court, the issue of the brevity of the five-day time limit for appeals, and of the unavailability of the impugned court judgments are related. 100. The Court notes that Article 575 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code of Burkina Faso provides that "to appeal to the Cour de Cassation ... the State and the parties are allowed five clear days after the impugned judgment is delivered inter partes 8 African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights, Sir Dawda K Jawara v. Gambia, Communication No. 147/95-149/96, para 31; African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights & Associated Newspapers ofZimbabwe v. Zimbabwe, Communication No. 284/03, para 116