262 Mizan Law Review Vol. 6 No.2, December 2012 submission as an applicant, the Commission alleged that violent suppression of demonstration by aerial bombardment and excessive use of heavy weapons and machine guns against the population resulting in death and injuries amounts ‘to serious violations of the right to life and to the integrity of persons, freedom of expression, demonstration and assembly.’142 The Court ordered provisional measures against Libya on its own motion as the Commission did not make a request to that effect.143 As long as direct access to the African Court by individuals and NGOs is limited and the Commission’s referral of cases remains discretionary, the solution to the massive backlog before the African Court is a distant possibility. Even more so, individuals and NGOs may bring cases that have already been decided by subregional courts to the African Commission with the hope of accessing the African Court. One may also optimistically assume that many African states will make declarations to allow individuals and NGOs to access the African Court. Under either scenario, there would be pressure on the resources of the African Court and the African Commission. Africa should thus prudently use its regional human rights institution and scarce resources. Africans need to learn a lesson from the European Court of Human Rights, which has become ‘a victim of its own success’ in recent years as it ‘faces a docket crisis of massive proportions.’144 Narrowing the admissibility criteria has been taken as one of the steps to reform the European Court.145 It is, therefore, submitted that the African Commission and the African Court should not admit cases decided by subregional courts because such cases unnecessarily consume their scarce time and resources. Any assumption that sub-regional courts might be subject to more local interests and open to manipulation is not supported by evidence. This assumption is not plausible because experience, on the contrary, shows that neighbouring countries are more concerned about human rights violations at their doorsteps. in fact, African governments with records of human rights violations rather incline towards opposing the human rights jurisdiction of subregional courts. These courts have been a challenge to states in the subregions. As evidenced by restructuring of East African Court of Justice and suspension of the SADC Tribunal, various African states are reacting to the 42 Ibid, para 2. para 9. 144 Laurence R Helfer (2008), ‘Redesigning the European Court of Human Rights: Embeddedness as a deep structural principle of the European human rights regime’ The European Journal of International Law 125, Vol. 19, p. 125. 145 Philip Leach (2009), ‘On reform of the European Court of Human Rights’ European Human Rights Law Review 725, Vol. 6, p. 728. 143 Ibid,