199/97 Odjouoriby Cossi Paul / Benin Summary of Facts 1. [The]Complainant is a national of Benin who alleges violation of his rights by the judiciary of his country. 2. It is alleged that the Appeal Court of Cotonou refused to restore his rights in a case pending before the said court since 1995 which sets him up against Mr Akitobi Honoré whom he accuses of having despoiled him of his real estate property with the complicity of some judges. 3. The Complainant considers that the attitude of the Appeal Court constitutes a denial of justice. Complaint 4. The Complainant alleges violation of Articles 7 and 14 of the [African] Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights ('African Charter'). Procedure 5. The Secretariat of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights ('African Commission') acknowledged having received the communication on 8th April 1997. 6. The African Commission was seized of the communication at its 22nd Ordinary Session and deferred its decision on admissibility to its 23rd Ordinary Session scheduled for April 1998. 7. During its 23rd Session held from 20th to 29th April 1998 in Banjul, The Gambia, the African Commission declared the communication admissible and deferred consideration of the merits of the case to its 24th Ordinary Session. 8. On 1st June 1998, a note was sent to the Government of Benin informing them that the communication had been declared admissible by the African Commission, pursuant to Article 56(1), and that the [African] Commission would rule on the merits during its 24th Ordinary Session scheduled for October 1998. A letter with the same message was sent also to the Complainant. 9. During the 28th Ordinary Session, the African Commission heard both parties. Through its representative, the Respondent State asked the African Commission to review its decision on admissibility as the Complainant had not exhausted local remedies. 10. The African Commission, noting that the Complainant had not put his case across logically, advised some NGOs to assist him. To this end, the case was entrusted to INTERIGHTS and to the Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa on behalf of the Complainant. 11. In any case, the African Commission took note of the undue delay of the Complainant's case before the courts. 12. From the submissions, it became apparent that in a civil case like this one, the conduct of proceedings is the responsibility of the parties in the case. The appeal filed against the judgment of the court of first instance is dated 19th September 1995 and the [African] Commission was seized of the case on 8th April 1997, that is 20 months after the filing of the appeal. It appears from the practice of the Appeal Court accepted by the Supreme Court that average period ranges between 4 and 5 years. 13. The African Commission upheld its decision on admissibility and deferred its decision on the merits to the 30th Ordinary Session held in Banjul, The Gambia, from 13th to 27th October 2001. 14. The communication was deferred on several occasions because the Complainant was not very familiar with the procedures of the African Commission. 15. The African Commission considered this communication at its 35th Ordinary Session held in Banjul, The Gambia and decided to deliver its decision on the merits. Law Admissibility 16. Article 56 of the [African] Charter provides, among other things, that communications shall be considered by the [African] Commission if they "are sent after exhausting local remedies, if any, unless it is 1