iH~~'ACHPR ~ (w.:mJ > African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights Human Rights our Collective Responsibility 61. The Complainants have also demonstrated the difficulty that the Victims face if they tried to enforce constitutional provisions that guarantee a right to selfdetermination as a means of resolving the issues at stake. In the face of the evidence before it, the Commission agrees that if at all it exists, the legal framework to sustain the Victims' claims in the present Communication is uncertain. The existence of a national implementation law that is specifically tailored to implement the constitutional provisions in favour of the pastoralist is not doubtful. The Respondent State has also failed to show how the African Charter can be applicable in its national courts. Accordingly, the Commission finds that the legal framework to sustain the Victims' claim in the Respondent State is unclear and uncertain. 62. The Commission also needs to determine whether the institutional framework necessary for the application of the relevant laws exists in the Respondent State. While the Complainants allege that effective and sufficient local remedies are unavailable, the Respondent State asserts that both its National Human Rights Commission and its courts are effective institutions available to the Victims. 63. As the Commission has previously held, the term "local remedies II as used in the African Charter refers to an internal remedy of a judicial nature.l? This is consistent with the Commission's position that local remedies that a Complainant is expected to exhaust under Article 56(5) of the African Charter should be remedies that are effective to the extent that they offer a prospect of success and are sufficient to the extent that are capable of rectifying the alleged violation.'! 64. The Commission notes that although it asserts that the EHRC has powers to receive and investigate complaints alleging human rights violation, the Respondent State has not indicated that the decisions of the EHRC are binding. Where the local remedy held out by a State Party is one that lacks powers that bind the government and its agencies, such a remedy falls short of the standard of remedies that international law requires a Complainant to exhaust.F The Commission is therefore, of the view that a petition to the Respondent State's EHRC is not a judicial remedy and does not hold the promise of an effective and sufficient remedy. The Complainants are accordingly not under an obligation to Arl (")I'gan of the African t.. "'u Union it's" 12