20. Frustrated with the process, especially with the fact that within fifteen months of filing, the case had been brought before five different judges none of whom had proceeded with it, the Complainants indicate that a letter was sent to the Chief Justice of Kenya stating that there appeared to be a deliberate placement of administrative and procedural obstacles in the path of the determination of the application brought on behalf of the Nubian community. In this regard, the Complainants indicate that no response to this letter, and other letters sent on 24 July 2004, 24 September 2004, and 24 January 2005 was received. 21. As a result, the Complainants submitted that, more than six years after the CEMIRIDE instituted proceedings on behalf of the Nubian community, no bench has been constituted and no date has been fixed for a substantive hearing on the case. By invoking jurisprudence from the African Commission, and highlighting the provisions of the African Children’s Charter and its Guidelines on the Consideration of Communications, the Complainants submit that such a delay is excessive, and should be seen as an exception to the exhaustion of local remedies rule. 22. The Complainants are of the view that the pursuit of local remedies by the Nubian community has been fraught with such impediments that it offers no prospect of success and children of Nubian descent living in Kenya cannot be reasonably expected to benefit from these local remedies. As a result of the above, the Complainants argue that the Communication should be declared admissible as it complies with all the requirements of the Guidelines for the Consideration of Communications. The African Committee’s analysis and decision on admissibility 23. The African Committee, after a detailed consideration of the Communication, agrees with the submission of the Complainants that the form of the Communication is in compliance with the Guidelines of the African Committee- i.e. it is not anonymous, it is written, and concerns a State Party to the African Children’s Charter. It also decides, after a thorough look at the Communication, that the Communication is compatible with the Constitutive Act of the African Union and with the African Children’s Charter. The Communication is presented in a professional, polite and respectful language, and is based on information provided, inter alia, by the alleged victims and on court documents, and not solely based on media reports. The Secretariat of the African Committee has also undertaken efforts to confirm that the same issue provided for the in the present Communication has not been considered according to another international procedure. 24. However, to decide on the less straightforward and important issue whether local remedies have been exhausted (and in connection to that, whether the present Communication has been brought within a reasonable period of time), which is an issue that probably would have been challenged by the Government of Kenya, the African Committee has scrutinsed the written and oral submissions by the Complainants in detail, and would offer below a more elaborate explanation. 25. At the outset, it should be mentioned that the African Children’s Charter explicitly mandates the African Committee, in Article 46 of the Charter, to: …draw inspiration from International Law on Human Rights, particularly from the provisions of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, the Charter of the Organization of African Unity, the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, the International Convention on the Rights of the Child, and other instruments adopted by the United Nations and by African countries in the field of human rights, and from African values and traditions. 5