Dawda K. Jawara v. The Gambia and Kazeem Aminu v. Nigeria, the Commission recognized that it would not be "logical" to require an individual to return to the State where he or she has allegedly suffered violations of his or her fundamental rights and from which he or she had fled, in order to bring a claim for reparation. 4 72. The Complainants aver that while an individual alleging torture and other ill-treatment in Uganda would normally be able to lodge a Complaint before the Ugandan High Court or the Uganda Human Rights Commission ("UHRC"), neither of these options is available to the Victim as he is unable to travel to Uganda due to his serious state of health; 5 his limited financial resources since he is unable to work as a result of his torture and other ill-treatment; and the fears he has for his safety and security given the manner in which he fled from Uganda.6 73. The Complainants argue that the serio11sness o,f the Victim's ,fear for his safety and security is reinforced by the , absence of a law or specific programme in place in Uganda providing protection for victims and wih1esses, and by the reports of harassments ofcomplainants of torture in Uganda such as: verbal intimidation, being followed by persons in unmarked cars and attempted arrests. 74. The Complainants argue that if the Victim brought a civil claim for compensation before the Ugandan High Court, he would most likely be subjected to an order for security for costs as he is a non-resident plaintiff. 7 To reinforce their arguments, the Complainants stipulated provisions from Order XXVIII Section 5 of the Ugandan Rules of Civil Procedure, which, states that "where any court to which an application is made for the issue of a commission for the examination of a person residing at any place not within Uganda is satisfied that the evidence of that person is necessary, the court may issue the commission or a letter of request". 75. Based on the above submission the Complainants argue that if this procedure of taking evidence on commission was ordered by the Court, 4 Communication 103/9 - Alhassan Abubakar vs. Ghana, paragraph 6. See also, Sir Dawda K. Jawara v. The Gambia, at para. 35; Communication 205/97 Kazeem Ami.nu v. Nigeria, para. 11. 5 See, Annex 4 containing the expert medical report by Drs. Morten Ekstrnm and Onder Ozkalipci, together with enclosures. According to the Complainants, further to the medical examinations, the victim has been advised to travel only for the purpose of receiving medical treatment. 6 See, Annex 2 containing the victim's affidavit. 7 Under Order XXVI section 1 of the Ugandan Civil Procedure Rules, a defendant is .l;ll _~_ i± · ~-l\; security for the payment of all costs. / /~ o"' ~ 1/.-,"'' sl:-c. l'l ·t . ":.-"" ~ :f 11} !, ~ '. .... 0 #~ r