Communication 341/07 - Equality Now v Ethiopia tireless efforts are being made to ensure equal protection of women with men as per the African Charter. It therefore requests the Commission to dismiss the matter. Additional Submissions of the Complainants on Admissibility 55. In response to the arguments of the State, the Complainants submit that domestic remedies were exhausted once the Victim's case was denied by the highest Court of Appeal, which is the Cassation Bench of the Federal Supreme Court. They state that the initiation of new legal proceedings against the principal suspects as an alternative means of punitive measures against Aberew - has no bearing on the issue of exhaustion of domestic remedies by Woineshet, as she had exhausted all domestic remedies available to her prior to filing the Communication with the Commission. They state that any new proceedings by the Government, which to date have not commenced, do not negate this fact and should be considered in the context of a review on the merits. 56. The Complainants further submit that the fact that the case of Woineshet on the charges of her abduction and rape by Aberew went up to the highest court, the Federal Supreme Court's Cassation bench, which declined to hear the matter, was not disputed by the Respondent State. They also state that there are no further remedies under Ethiopian law that can be exercised by the Victim, and that she has no legal right to seek further action by the Government against Aberew. 57. Whilst the Complainants appreciate and applaud the efforts that have since been made by the Respondent State to protect and promote the human rights of women in Ethiopia, including through the amendment of the Ethiopian Constitution and the ratification of international and regional human rights instruments, they maintain that the protection offered by the laws and standards to which the Respondent State is bound was not extended to Woineshet, that the Courts did not correctly implement the law and that the legal system therefore failed to provide to Woineshet the legal protection to which she was entitled. 58. They further aver that the Government's submission itself implicitly recognizes this failure in highlighting the dissatisfaction of the Justice Bureau of Oromiya with the judgments, and by indicating its intention to bring a charge of statutory rape against Aberew. 59. In response to the Respondent State's contention in its submission of October 2007, that it had initiated a new case against Aberew, which was allegedly pending as at the time of the State's submission in 2007, the Complainants, in rebuttal, follows: