the Commission's jurisprudence, while remedy may exist in theory, it may not need to be exhausted if it is unavailable, inadequate, or ineffective. Accordingly, the Commission will proceed to determine whether the existing remedies in the Respondent State were available, adequate and sufficient, in relation to the Victim in the present Communication. 87. In the present Communication the Complainants contend that the Respondent State's in ufficient investigation led to the failure to prosecute the Victim's traffickers, rendering the remedies unavailable and ineffective. The Complainants submit that, following escape from her captors on 18 October 2017, the Victim went to the Cenh·al Police Station, reported that she was a victim of human trafficking and provided the police with her laptop and phone. As detailed in paragraph 15 above, the Victim remained in detention from 20 October 2017 until her departure from the Respondent State, without any explanation from the police on the reasons for her detention, or information on an investigation being undertaken in her case. The Complainants further submit that on 14 June 2018, Ms. Van Wyk, of the LAC, was informed by Commissioner Agas that the police investigation in the case of human trafficking for purposes of sexual exploitation had been concluded and the case closed. 88. The Respondent State, on the other hand, avers that the Complainant n ver sought legal recourse in the Republic of Namibia, and submits that a criminal investigation into the matter commenced immediately and a criminal case opened, as indicated in paragraph 55. 89. In its jurisprudence, the Commission has, in a number of cases, determined that the available remedies were .ineffective when authorities knew of a violation but failed to act; 22 for example, when the State fails to investigate or prosecute those responsible for alleged violations despite having notice of the allegations, the Commission will consider the remedies ineffective, although available. 23 90. This is further elaborated in Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum v. Zimbabwe, in which the Commission held: "The responsibility of maintainin · der in any country lies with the State, specifically with the police forceilliat"Statec: , ,., I, ,) , .. ch, it is the duty of the State to ensure through its police force ,. "at · ere 1ere . a 1 ~n ~ See Com munications 54/91, 61/91, 98/93, 164/97 & 196/97, 210/98 Malawi .. ~ "' ~ ric~ Asi o iatlon, International, Ms Sarr Diop, UIADH and RADDHO, Collectif des veuves et ayan P.)it Mb v. Communications 48/90, 50/91, 52/91, 89/93, Amnesty International, Comitl! Loosli B , , td &W3/er$~ On;uWt for Human Rights, Association of Members of the Episcopal Conference of East Africa v. )-IC'qfl 23 Communication 379/09: Monim Elgak, Osman Hummeida and Amir SuJiman (r presente _ Cf) v. Sudan (2014) AOiPR, paragraph 56. See also Communication 386/10: Dr. Farouk Mohamed Ibrahim represented by REDRESS) v. Sudan; Communication 275/03: Article 19 v. Eritrea 22 17