difficulties in contacting them had he remained in Sudan, as he did from his location in Kenya. 112. Furthermore, without going into the question as to whether he had left the country of his free will, as he had been warned prior to his arrest to discontinue his work as a journalist (see paragraph 6 above), it is likely that he would have suffered mental distress on this account even if he had remained in Sudan. For these reasons, the Commission finds that submitting the Complaint within 13 months of his release and 11 months of his resettlement is not an unjustifiable delay in this case. Therefore, the Commission finds that the Complainant had complied with the requirement under Article 56(6). 113. The Complainant indicates that in compliance with Article 56(7), the Complaint has not been submitted to any other procedure of international investigation or settlement. The Respondent State did not provide any contrary argument. The Commission thus finds that the requirement under Article 56(7) has been complied with. 114.For these reasons, the Commission is satisfied that the Complainant has complied with all the requirements for admissibility as set out under Article 56. Decision of the Commission on Admissibility 115. In view of the above, the Commission declared the Communication admissible. Merits The Complainant's Submissions on Merits Alleged violation of Article 5 of the African Charter 116. The Complainant submits that the Respondent State violated Article 5 of the African Charter when he was beaten by NISS officers at the al-Nuhood Police Station on 10 June 2014, detained in an overcrowded and unsanitary prison condition, refused necessary medical care, subjected to mental trauma as a result of being held indefinitely without notice as to the cause of his arrest and detention; and the failure of the Respondent State to investigate these abuses and provide redress for injuries incurred. 27 I Page