Prosecution Attorney, a Magistrate may order the continued detention of the arrested person, for the purpose of inquiry, every week for a period not exceeding in total two weeks. The Commission notes that the Emergency and Protection of Public Safety Act of 1997 does not stipulate any such time frame but rather contemplates a special court in which persons arrested pursuant to the Emergency Law may be arraigned and tried. 87 A recourse which was never made accessible to the Complainant. 157. It is therefore important to reiterate that the African Charter does not allow State Parties to derogate from their treaty obligations during emergency situations. ss Thus, the guarantees contained in Article 6 must be effectively enforced at all times, even in public emergencies threatening the life of the nation. This comprise, in particular, the right of anyone arrested or detained on a criminal charge to be informed, at the time of arrest, of the reasons for his/her arrest, the charges brought against him/her and must be brought promptly before a competent judicial authority.89 In the circumstance, it cannot therefore be considered that the Respondent State displayed the required diligence in ensuring that its law enforcement agents upheld and protected the rights enshrined in the African Charter in the exercise of their power of arrest. 158. The Commission in the case of Patrick Okiring and Agupio Samson (represented by Human Rights Network and ISIS--WICCE) v. Republic of Uganda, held that the right to liberty serves as a substantive guarantee that 'any arrest or detention will not be unlawful or arbitrary' .90 In defining arbih·ariness in the context of arrest and detention, the Commission referred to the decision of the United Nations Human Rights Committee in Rafnel Marques de Morais (represented by the Open SociehJ Institute and Interigh.ts) v Angoln where it noted that arbitrariness also includes "elements of inappropriateness, injustice, lack of predictability and due process of law". 91 Hence, the Complainant's prolonged remand without affording him the opportunity to challenge the lawfulness of his detention was arbitrary and unlawful, and therefore outside the permissible limitations to the right to personal liberty. 92 For these reasons, the Commission finds the Respondent State in violation of Article 6 of the African Charter. 87 (As above) sec 6 (2) provides: The president of the repubJic, or any person he delegates, may set, in consultation with the chief justice, special courts (trial and appellate) to try any accused under this act and he may specify the procedures of these courts. 88 (N 80 above) Communication 275/03 para 98. 89 Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Assistance in Africa 2003 art 1 and 2; and the Robben Island Guidelines paras25,26 and 27. 90 Communication 339/2007 - Patrick Okin'ng and Agupio Samson (re-presented by Human Riglzts Network and 1515-WICCE) v. Republic of Uganda para 107. ~ HUM4 91 Communication 1128/2002 -Rafael Marques de Morais (represented~ ~ fili-&lfl.e't.o/. • stitute and 4 lnteriglits) v Angola (2005) Human Rights Council, para 6.1. s - - - ,.. '°«-0 92 Communication 232/99 - Ouko v. Kenya (2000) AHRLR135 (A R 2 0, ~'\5 - -21; Communications 25/89, 47/90, 56/91 and 100/93 - Free Legal A.J1 uEstanc Gr ' -1~ ~1J!i O 'lfil'S'v Zaire o ~ :--~ ,. (2000) AHRLR 74 (ACHPR 1995) para 42. '\ ct '¾ .. ...., ;; c i" t ' ~ ~ ~ \\ °\ , AU-UA d _.:: ,<' V Q 'lt4,•R,cA1t-1t ~c.:,."? '<--<-,/ u>a - - ~ o¾ v~",, <i,: r.tf n o1:sPt ✓ 39 I Page