nature” or that “have no obligation to decide according to legal principles” to preclude the admissibility of a communication under Article 56.7 of the African Charter. The African Commission would say that this is clearly not the case with regard to the Claims Commission as has been demonstrated by Article 5(13) of the Peace Agreement that provides that it is bound to apply rules of international law and cannot make decisions ex aequo et bono. This therefore puts the Claims Commission under those bodies envisaged underArticle 56 (7). 57. From the submissions of the Respondent States, it seems to the African Commission, that the matters brought before it, are matters that have been placed before the Claims Commission which can therefore adequately deal with such matters. 58. At the 31st Ordinary Session, the Complainants requested the African Commission to defer nd consideration of these communications to the 32 Ordinary Session to enable them submit written responses to the Respondent States’ submissions. The African Commission granted the request and informed the parties accordingly. The Secretariat of the African Commission has written to the Complainants asking them to forward the stated written responses but there has been no reaction from them. 59. In principle the appropriate remedy of those claims submitted to the Claims Commission should be monetary compensation. However, it is also within the Claims Commission’s mandate to provide other types of remedies that are acceptable within international practice. It is probable that the African Commission will reach a decision finding the Respondent States in violation of the rights of the individuals on whose behalf INTERIGHTS is acting. However, as was the case in Emgba Mekongo Louis/Cameroon (supra), the African Commission would certainly be constrained in awarding compensation and may have to refer this matter to the Claims Commission and at which point the matter would certainly be time barred. 60. While the African Commission would have opted to proceed and deal with the instant communications, the Respondent States Parties have assured the African Commission that all the issues before the African Commission will be brought before the Claims Commission. Holding For these reasons, the African Commission decides as follows:      to suspend consideration of communication 233/99 and 234/99 sine die, and await the decision of the Claims Commission with regard to matters contained in this communication; that the Respondent States keep the African Commission regularly informed of the process before the Claims Commission with particular reference to the matters contained in these communications; the Republic of Ethiopia and the State of Eritrea are requested to transmit a copy of the text of the decision of the Claims Commission to the Secretariat of the African Commission as soon as it is delivered; in the event that the Claims Commission does not fully address the human rights violations contained herein, to reopen the matter for consideration; reserves its decision on the merits of these communications. rd Taken at the 33 Ordinary Session in Niamey, Niger May 2003.