unreasonable and there is therefore no compelling reason why the Communication meets the requirement under Article 56(6)",17 54. Similarly, considering that the Complainants had concluded that there was no opportunity for justice in the Respondent State, and in the absence of a compelling reason to justify the delay in approaching the Commission in June 2015, or shortly thereafter, the Commission accordingly finds that the requirements of Article 56(6) of the African Charter have not been satisfied. 55. Article 56(7) of the African Charter provides that the Commission shall consider Communications which "do not deal with cases which have been settled by these States involved in accordance with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, or the Charter of the Organization of African Unity or the provisions of the present Charter." 56. In relation to Article 56(7) of the Charter, the Complainants stated the following: "I declare and confirm that the complaint is only being forwarded before the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, and it has never been forwarded to any other international" institution. 57. The Commission however notes that the Complainants submitted a document titled, "Opinions adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention at its sixty-eight session, 13-22 November 2013,"18 which the Complainants referenced as a "Communication addressed to the Government; among these is the enforced disappearance of the victim."19 58. The Commission observes that this document indicates: "Communications addressed to the Government on 07 August 2013"; and that the Respondent State in question is the Arab Republic of Egypt, and one of the listed victims (Dr. Essam Al-Haddad) is the same one presented in this Communication before the Commission.w Furthermore, the case before the Working Group relates to the arbitrary detention of Dr. Morsi and his advisers, representing similar facts as in the present Communication before the Commission. 59. In Sudan Human Rights Organization & Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE) v. Sudan, the Commission held that, "a matter shall be considered settled within the context of Article 56(7) of the African Charter, if it was settled by any of the UN human rights treaty bodies or any other international adjudication mechanism, 17 Communication para 45 414112: Lawyers for Human Rights (Swaziland) 13/, December 2013 Annex to Letter from the Complainant, submitted 20 Supra note 18, paragraph 6 v. The Kingdom 18 A/HRC/WGAD/20 19 on 19 December 201 p .~\:,:::~:; "' . " ,",~~"":,;,,,,;'''' ;' . -,' 10 of Swaziland (2015) ACHPR,