67. The Complainant alleges that the Respondent State failed to perform its obligation to protect human rights by not making remedies available to the victims. In the case of Munyaradzi Never Chitsenga, the criminal inquest finds that no one was to be prosecuted. The Complainant submits that the verdict of the criminal inquest would not have precluded proceeding with a compensatory claim had the law been in place. Similarly even if a criminal prosecution has been instigated against soldiers who killed Lameck AC HP R Chemvura, that would not have precluded a claim for wrongful death had such a remedy been available, in as much as a civil claim for loss of support would have been made against the soldiers had the deceased been married. The Complainant argues that it is thus no defence that criminal remedies have been or are being pursued. 68. Based on the above, the Complainant prays the African Commission to find the Respondent State to be in breach of Articles 1 and 4 of the African Charter. The African Commission is called upon to request the Respondent State to take corrective measures, including complying with its obligations under the African Charter by passing legislation in order to create an action for bereavement damages; and to afford just compensation to be divided equally between the parents or duly appointed heirs of the deceased in the sum of US$40, 000, 000.00. Respondent State’s Submission on the Merits 69. In the case of Beavan Tatenda Kazingachire, the Respondent State submits that police officers were on patrol on the night of 12 January 2001. They were on follow-up of notorious armed robbers. One of the robbers had been arrested and volunteered to indicate to police his accomplices. The arrested robber pointed out a Nissan Sunny car as one of the vehicles used by one of 17