another international body or procedure in accordance with any legal instruments of the Africa Union and principles of the United Nations Charter. In this regard and as part of the investigation, the Committee officially requested the African Court on Human and Peoples‟ Rights and the ACHPR if the matter in the communication at hand has ever been brought to their attention. In its response, the ACHPR informed the Committee that the matter has never been presented both to the Commission and the Court. Consequently, the Committee holds the view that the Communication has complied with the requirement in Section IX (1) C) of the Revised Communication Guidelines. 29. Section IX (1) (D) of the Revised Communication Guidelines provides that the author of a communication should exhaust all available and accessible local remedies before it brings the matter to the Committee. The Committee takes the view that the issue of exhaustion of local remedies calls for detailed explanation. To start with, a local remedy has been defined as „any domestic legal action that may lead to the resolution of the complaint at the local or national level.‟2 As the Committee in Children of Nubian Descent Case noted, „one of the main purposes of exhaustion of local remedies, which is also linked to the notion of state sovereignty, is to allow the Respondent State be the first port of call to address alleged violations at the domestic level.‟ While the requirement of exhaustion of local remedies necessitates that States must be given the opportunity to address the violation first, it also implies that efforts in addressing the violation should not be unduly prolonged. This exception to the principle of exhaustion of local remedies is particularly important when it comes to protection of children‟s rights as time matters most when it comes to children than other group of human beings. In this regard, the Committee stated that „The implementation and realization of children‟s rights in Africa is not a matter to be relegated for tomorrow, but an issue that is in need of proactive, immediate attention and action.‟3 30. The Committee notes, however, established rules under international human rights law require that only domestic remedies that are available, effective and adequate (sufficient) can be exhausted. The ACHPR clarified the law on exhaustion of domestic remedies presupposes: „(I) the existence of domestic procedures for dealing with the claim; (ii) the domestic justiciability of the subject-matter of the complaint; (iii) the existence under the municipal legal order of provisions for redress of the type of wrong being complained of; and (iv) available effective local remedies, that is, remedies sufficient or capable of redressing the wrong complained of.4 31. According to the Commission, a remedy is available if the petitioner can pursue it without impediments or if he can make use of it in the circumstances of his case. 5 The word „available‟ is defined by the Commission as „readily obtainable; accessible‟; or „attainable, reachable; on call, on hand, ready, present; convenient, at one‟s service, at one‟s command, at one‟s disposal.6 In other words, remedies the availability of which is not evident and is beyond practical reach of the complainant cannot be raised to the detriment of the Complainant. 32. Although the Committee notes that the right to appeal is recognized under the Cameroonian Constitution and Criminal Procedure Code, the Complainants couldn‟t exercise this right as the Magistrate Court placed impediments in their way by not releasing the records of the court that are required to appeal the decision. As the African Commission on Human and Peoples‟ Rights held in the Law Offices of Ghazi Suleiman v Sudan, the right of appeal is a right falling under the right to have one‟s cause heard under Article 7 of the Charter. 7 The right of appeal is also a determinant for the fulfilment of the requirement of exhaustion of local remedies. By denying the victim‟s representatives the records, the Magistrate Court had denied them the right to initiate any form of private legal action, whether civil or criminal, as all the original evidence required is part of the court records that have been denied to them; 2 Civil Liberties Organisation and Others v Nigeria (2001) AHRLR 75 (ACHPR 2001) Decision on the Communication submitted by the Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa and the Open Society Justice Initiative (on behalf of children of Nubian Descent in Kenya) against the Government of Kenya; Communication: No. 33 4 o Article 19 v. Eritrea (2007) AHRLR 73 (ACHPR 2007), Communication N 275/2003, May 2007, Para. 47 5 147/95-149/96: Sir K. Jawara / Gambia (The), Para. 32 and 33 3 6 7 See Anuak Justice Council V Ethiopia Communication no. 299/2005, para 51. See Law Offices of Ghazi Suleiman v Sudan communication no. 222/98 and 229/99, para 51-53. 6