Supreme Court,15 is subject to specific circumstances, namely, error in the application of the law or misinterpretation thereof. 48. The Court observes that the Applicants maintain that they were unable to exhaust local remedies in respect of the two complaints raised, namely, the administration’s refusal to include the Applicants on the list of cadet superintendents, and the incompatibility of Articles 125 and 127 of the Law of 12 July 2010 with the international obligations of the Respondent State. 49. The Court further notes that before filing the instant Application, the Applicants complied with the procedure before the Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court, which issued Judgment No. 258 of 5 May 2016 dismissing their request for regularisation as cadet superintendents of Police. 50. The Court also observes that Articles 11016 and 11117 of the Organic Law on the Supreme Court provides that decisions of the Administrative Division of the Supreme Court are final and, therefore, not subject to appeal. It follows that the Applicants exhausted local remedies with regard to the request relating to the police administration’s refusal to enrol them on the list of Cadet Superintendents and Inspectors of Police. 51. As regards the incompatibility of Articles 125 and 127 of the Law of 12 July 2010 with human rights instruments, the Court notes that under article 8518 of the Respondent State’s Constitution, the only possible remedy is to challenge the constitutionality of the law, in particular its compatibility with fundamental human rights. 15 Law No. 2016-046 of 23 September 2016, Article 256: "Where a judgment of the Administrative Division is vitiated by a material error likely to have influenced the judgment of the case, the interested party may lodge a trainee appeal with the Division". 16 Ibid., Article 110; “The Administrative Division is the supreme judge of all decisions handed down by the lower administrative courts and of decisions handed down in the final instance by administrative bodies of a judicial nature”. 17 Ibid., Article 111: “The Administrative Division has jurisdiction to rule, in the first and last instance, on appeals for abuse of power against decrees, ministerial or interministerial orders, and acts of national or independent administrative authorities”. 18 Organic law no. 97-010 of 11 February 1997, article 85 “The Constitutional Court is the judge of the constitutionality of laws and guarantees fundamental human rights and public freedoms”. 13