13. The Author states that the Complaint has not been referred to any other international settlement body. Articles alleged to have been violated 14. The Author alleges violation of Articles 2, 3, 4, 5,6, 7, 12, 14, 16, 19, 20(1) and 28 of the African Charter. Prayers 15. The Author requests the Commission in accordance with Rule 79 of its Rules of Procedure to issue: 1. . An order as specifically provided for by law for the Respondent State to honour, respect and abide by the recent AU denunciation of the ICC and stay all further engagements, actions and communications with the ICC; 2. An Interim Order, when necessary or at the volition of the Commission given the urgency and severity of the matter, to urgently hear this matter and make the necessary determination as in keeping with law; 3. Order the Respondent State to adhere to and abide by the tenets, spirit and intent of its own Constitution and thereby enact the requisite legislation for the creation of an independent body or commission that will investigate and prosecute, if any, alleged violators of any crimes committed under the Rome Treaty that was initially ratified by Parliament and domesticated as part of its laws and 4. Grant unto Applicant all and any further relief, which although not specifically pleaded herein this Application, but which the Commission may deem just, legal and equitable as in keeping with the rules of the Commission and other applicable international human rights instruments. Procedure 16. The Secretariat received the Complaint on 10 January 2014 and acknowledged receipt of the same on 16January 2014. After review of the Complaint, the Secretariat discovered that the Complaint was unclear, and therefore wrote a letter requesting clarification on 11 February 2014. The Secretariat received an amended copy of the Complaint on 19 February 2014, and acknowledged receipt of the same on 26 February 2014. Analysis of the Commission on Seizure 17. The Commission finds that the Complaint contains disparaging and insulting language, in contravention of Article 56(3) of the African Charter, which sets out the basis on which the Commission shall consider Communications which are submitted to it under Article 55 of the Charter. 18. The Complaint contains expressions such as: "Sickening"; "Charade"; "the Respondent is part of the ploy"; "trample under"; "fishing expedition"; "demonization" which in the view of the Commission are disparaging and insulting. 19. In addition, the Author has failed to indicate any steps taken to exhaust domestic remedies nor provided grounds alleging the impossibility or unavailability of domestic remedies as provided under Rule 93 (2) (i). Complaint merely addressed Rule 93 (2) (f) on 'public authority that has taken cognisance of the alleged situation alleged'. 20. Further the Author has failed to show a link between the Articles of the African Charter allegedly violated and the account of act or situation complained of, therefore, failing to reveal a prima facie violation of the African Charter. 21. To conclude, the Commission is of the view that for a Complaint of this nature, consent of the Victims should have been sought and signatures of the Victims placed on the Complaint prior to its submission to 2