[to] which article 56(5) refers entails remedy sought from courts of a judicial nature ... "51 Furthermore, "[t]he author [of a Communication] must have taken the matter to all the available domestic legal remed ies. That is, he or she must have taken the case to the highest court of the land." 52 However, when a remedy is a discretionary, extraordinary remedy of a non-judicial nature, then the Complainants are not required to pursue it as part of the requirement of exhaustion of local remedies."53 77. The import of the foregoing is that Article 56(5) of the African Charter contemplates the exhaustion of the ordinary remedies of common law that exist in the judicial courts of the Respondent States. The remedies required to be pursued must also be 'available, effective and sufficient". 54 78. Furthermore, in Monim Elgak, Osman Hummeida and Amir Suliman (represented by FIDH and OMCT) v. Sudan, 55 the African Commission held that Complainants are required to exhaust local judicial remedies in accordance with the laws of the country concerned, which include laws that govern procedural matters. However, the requirement of exhaustion of local remedies is not an absolute rule, it has exceptions put in place to ensure that complainants will not be hindered from bringing potential human rights violations before the African Commission as a result of procedural impediments emanating from unjust laws or practices. 79. In light of the above-cited jurisprudence of the African Commission in relation to this requirement, and having reviewed the submissions of the Complainant, the African Commission in this case upholds the Complainant's claim for exemption from exhaustion of local remedies in relation to alleged violations of Articles 6 and 7 of the African Charter for the reasons that local remedies are unavailable to challenge the arbitrary detention in alleged violation of Article 6 of the African Charter, because under Sudanese law, the detention is lawful and permitted, and cannot be routinely challenged in court, in view of: (i) Article 50( 1)( e) of the NSA 2010 of the Respondent State, which vests the NSS with the power to detain any suspected person without an arrest warrant,56 as opposed to the African Charter guarantees of the right to personal liberty under Article 6 of the African Charter and the subsidiary Guidelines on the Conditions of Arrest, Police Custody and Pre-Trial Detention in Africa (the Luanda Guidelines) which require that arrests Mauritania (2004) ACHPR, para 27. 51 Communication 221/98 - Alfred B. Cudjoe vs. Ghana (1999) ACHPR, para 14. s2Information Sheet No. 3 on the Communications Procedure, available at <http://www.achpr.org/communications/procedure/>. 53 Communication 379/09 (fn 19 above), para. 67 54 Communications 147/95-149/96, fn 13 above, & Communication 155/96: The Social and Economic Rights Action Centre (SERAC) v Nigeria, para. 37. 55 Communication 379/09 (fn 19 above), para 58. 56 See gene~ally, S. 50(1), _ NSA 2010 (available at https://sgbv-ihrda.uwazi.io(en/entity/0jlrotxryodk). See als.2,J?~ ~6._..31 & 66 of the African Comm1ss1on's Concluding Observations on the 4th & 5th Periodic State Report of SudanJ1WNava1lable,,q! https://www.achpr.org/public/Document/file/English/concluding_observation_.pdij; and para. B of Ac_p,fe-s[dl'ltefrmflfnal's submission on The Sudan to the UN Universal Periodic Review 11th session of the UPR Working Groue_J'Ma1 ava le ~ at https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/filesnib-docs/HRBodies/UPR/Documents/Session11/SD/A1~j\mn tylntem.aijona ) "? ~ eng.pdij. L "-"' I :c ~ v,(. .!. ~ .e (i I "'-...... ,-.1.l \J,. 16 v-,0 .., >;,.. ··~. -----~ v".- <..- ~ s,o (I ~ N." ~. -~ •H,C ••'"" ,'<...:;; 'Ot,•1,:E I: 1 I)< ::;c.- ">'