The Commission's Analysis on Admissibility 99. Article 56 of the African Charter governs the Admissibility of Communications and provides seven requirements based on which the Commission assesses the Admissibility of Communications submitted before it. 100. The Complainants in this Communication claim that all the requirements of Admissibility under Article 56 of the African Charter have been met. The Respondent State argues that the Complainants have not exhausted local remedies as required by Article 56(5) of the,African Charter. 101. The Commission therefore notes that the sole contentious Article between the Parties is with respect to the requirement under Article 56(5) of the African Charter. After carefully examining the Communication and the submissions of both Parties, the Commission notes that the authors have indicated that the Communication is compatible with the provisions of the Charter and the Constitutive Act of the AU as ·,it outlines a prima facie case of the violations of Articles 1, 5, 6, and 7 of the African Charter; it is not written in disparaging or insulting language; it is not exclusively based on news disseminated through the mass media; it was submitted within a reasonable time; and has not been settled through other international procedures. 102. Further, since the RespondentState did not make any submissions to the contrary, the Commission is convinced that the Communication meets six of the Admissibility requireme.n ts under Article 56 of the African Charter which has been ~dequately substantiated by the Complainants, raise no contentious issues and require no further examination. To this end, the analysis on Admissibility of this Communication will focus on the requirements contained in Article 56(5) of the African Charter. 103.Article 56(5) of the African Charter stipulates that Communications should be 'sent after exhausting local remedies, if any, unless it is obvious that this procedure is unduly prolonged'. The principle of exhaustion of local remedies is a well-recognized principle of international law. The rationale behind this principle is that States should be given the opportunity to address the issue before the matter is brought before international treaty bodies. Besides, the international adjudicatory bodies are not meant to function as first instance jurisdictions, especially where effective and available local remedies exist. :::g~~ ,. _,'/4 l ~l . ,· '-: . ~ \ ,,.1\. ~