the Complainant whether the Complainant was in another country of free will or under duress is irrelevant, the relevant consideration being that he was residing in another country at the time of filing the complaint. 77. The Complainant further submits that it is in line with the Commission's decision in Obert Chinhnmo v Zimbabwe to find that 11 months from relocation is a reasonable period under article 56(6), since he needed time to settle in Nairobi and consider his position, which was also challenging given that he was separated from his family and friends and no longer had an income from journalism. The Complainant also reiterated the considerations in the Commission's jurisprudence of complexities of getting representation before an international body and the challenges of communication systems in Africa. 78. The Complainant submits that he met his legal representatives for the first time on 15 May 2015, and that they were based in Uganda, which made it difficult for them to obtain instructions, but that they interviewed to Complainant again on 12 June, 21 July and 10 September 2015, and filing the complaint with five (5) months after his initial meeting with his legal representatives. The Complainant also referred to the jurisprudence of the UN Human Rights Committee and the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights, which, like the Commission do not provide fixed timeframes for submissions where the Complainant was not required to exhaust domestic remedies. Drawing from this the Complainant submits that the Commission should take into account the political instability in the Respondent State at the time, as evidenced by the declaration of the state of emergency. The Complainant in addition submits that the State has not submitted nor is there any evidence that the State had suffered prejudice because of the time taken in filing the Communication. The Complainant thus reiterates that he has complied with the requirements under Article 56(6). 79. For these reasons, the Complainant maintains that the requirements under Article 56 have been met and the Communication should be found admissible. Commission's Analysis on Admissibility 80. Article 56 of the African Charter outlines seven (7) conditions which must all be met for a Communication to be declared admissible. Failure to comply with one or several of these conditions renders the Communication inadmissible.