The Admissibility of Subregional Courts’ Decisions before the African Commission. .. 263 decisions of subregional courts by amending their constitutions or taking other decisions. The assumption does not thus justify the admissibility of subregional courts’ decisions before the African Commission or African Court. 3.2. Finality of Subregional Courts’ Decisions International146 courts or tribunals are usually empowered to render final and binding decisions no matter how different their subjects of jurisdiction are. A perusal of instruments establishing international courts and tribunals reveals that the finality of their decisions does not depend on the number of states party to the constituting instrument or on the permanent or temporary nature of the court or tribunal. For example, the Statute of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), to which almost all states are party, provides that the judgement of the Court is ‘final and without appeal.’147 The 2000 Algiers Peace Agreement which was concluded between Ethiopia and Eritrea at the end of Ethio-Eritrean war can be another example.148 Article 5(17) of this Agreement establishes a neutral Claims Commission, a temporary arbitral tribunal, and provides that the decision of the Commission is ‘final and binding.’ The Treaties establishing subregional courts in Africa are no exception. They provide that the decisions of these courts are final and binding.149 These treaties foreclose any appeal from subregional courts to regional bodies like the African Commission and the African Court, or any other global courts and tribunals such as the ICJ. A concern raised in this regard is that ‘it may be desirable to give room for reference of cases from’ subregional courts as these courts are not ‘specifically established for the purpose of human rights protection.’150 146 The word ‘international’ is used here to mean ‘connected with or involving more than one [state].’ See A S Hornby Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English (2000) 680. It refers to all supra national institutions whether they are subregional, regional or global. 147 Art 60 of the Statute of International Court of Justice. 148 Peace Agreement between the Government of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia and the Government of the State of Eritrea signed in Algiers, Algeria on 12 December 2000 available at <http://server.nijmedia.nl/pcacpa.org/showfile.asp?fil_id=1030> (accessed on 13 November 2011). 149 Art 76(2) of the Revised ECOWAS Treaty provides that the decision of the ECOWAS Community Court ‘shall be final and shall not be subject to appeal; Art 16(5) of SADC Treaty provides that ‘the decisions of the Tribunal shall be final and binding.’ Art 35(1) of the Treaty Establishing the East African Community stipulates that the judgment of the Community Court is ‘final, binding and conclusive and not open to appeal.’ Art 31(1) the COMESA Treaty provides that the judgment of the COMESA Court is ‘final and conclusive and not open to appeal. ’ 150 Solomon T Ebobrah (2009), ‘The admissibility of cases before the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights: who should do what?’ Malawi Law Journal 87, Vol. 3, p. 98.