constitutional references or applications in which he pleaded a carbon copy of substantive issues pleaded in the present Communication. He states that in moving the courts in Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 22 of 2004, Civil Appeal No. 266 of 2008, Court of Appeal Civil Application No. NAI 261 of 2007, and Supreme Court Petition of Appeal No 2 of 2012 among others, he pleaded violations of provisions of the con,stitution including relating to his fundamental rights under the then Constitution of the Respondent State. He produces to the Commission various rulings relating to Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 22 of 2004, and a decision in High Court Petition 584 of 2006. He states that despite lodging a notice of appeal in Court of Appeal Petition 584 of 2006, the High Court has to-date deliberately refused to supply certified copies of proceedings to enable him to lodge a record of appeal to the Court of Appeal. Accordingly, he submits that the Respondent State's submission that he did not lodge a constitutional reference or petition is unsustainable. 40. The Complainant reiterates his submissions that (a) local remedies are not available to him because of serious Breakdown ~£trust ahd professional etiquette between him and the judiciary;, and (b) ·domestis/procedures have been unduly prolonged. He prays that the Communication should be declared admissible. The Commission's analysis on admissibility 41. A Communication submitted to the Commission under Article 55 of the Charter must satisfy the seven admissibility conditions stipulated under Article 56 of the Charter. It is well established that the conditions under Article 56 of the Charter are cumulative and must all be satisfied for a Communication to be declared admissible. Consequently, if one of the conditions is not met, the Communication will be declared inadmissible entirely or in the respects that it does not satisfy a given condition or condition(s). The Complainant must accordingly address all the admissibility requirements, and the Respondent State must address the requirements, as necessary. Where this is not the case, the Commission still examines the admissibility of a Communication in respect of each condition based on the available information. 4 42. The Commission notes that in the present Communication both parties have advanced submissions on exhaustion of local remedies only. Nevertheless, the Commission has examined the Communication in respect of the rest of the