16. On 30 April 2012, the Commission issued Provisional Measures and requested the Respondent State to: • Immediately refrain from any actions, measures or threats to the life and personal security of the Victim and his family; • Investigate the death threats and other attacks on the life and personal security of the Victim and his family; and • Allow the Victim to exercise his right to participate as a candidate in the elections, and provide equitable access to state controlled media during the campaign period as required by the African Charter and the Angolan Constitution. 17. A copy of the Provisional Measures was forwarded to the Respondent State on 11 May 2012. 18. By letter dated 18 May 2012, the Complainant was informed about Seizure of the Communication and a copy of the Provisional Measures was forwarded to the same. A Note Verbale informing the Respondent State about the Complaint was also sent on the same date. 19. On 21 June 2012, the Complainant forwarded a letter to the Secretariat, requesting for a follow up of the Provisional Measures sent to the Respondent State. The letter noted specifically that elections are due in August 2012 and that the Victim has been inhibited from freely campaigning. 20. By letter dated 26 June 2012, the Secretariat acknowledged receipt of the Complainant's follow-up letter and informed the latter that it will be tabled before the Commission during its next Session. 21. On 18 July 2012, the Secretariat received the Complainant's additional submissions on Admissibility, acknowledged receipt on 19 July 2012 and forwarded to the Respondent State on the same date. 22. The Commission at its 12th Extra-Ordinary Session which took from 30 July to 4 August 2012 in Algiers, Algeria considered the implementation of its Provisional Measures, and decided that the Provisional Measures be resent. 23. On 21 August 2012, the Secretariat forwarded a Note Verbale to the Respondent State resending the Provisional Measures. It requested the Respondent State to report to the Commission on the actions taken to implement the Provisional Measures issued against it within fifteen (15) days of the receipt of the request for Provisional Measures. 24. On 28 September 2012, the Secretariat received the Respondent State's Portuguese submissions on Admissibility and responses to the Provisional Measures issued by the Commission and sent for translation. 25. In a letter dated 3 December 2012, the Respondent State's submissions were forwarded to the Complainant. The Secretariat also informed the Complainant that the Commission considered the non-Compliance of Provisional Measures by the State and decided to proceed on Admissibility. The reason being that the matter could not be referred to the African Court under Rule 118(2) because the Respondent State has not ratified the Court Protocol. 26. In a Note Verbale dated 4 December 2012, the Secretariat acknowledged receipt of the Respondent State's submissions after ascertaining the content. The Secretariat noted that the 15 days required by the State to respond to the Provisional Measures expired on 4 September 2012 and in that regard, the Commission considered non-compliance of Provisional Measures by the State during its 52nd[[/sup]] Ordinary Session and decided to proceed on Admissibility. 27. The Communication was deferred during the 53rd Ordinary Session of the Commission to allow time for the preparation of a decision on Admissibility. The Complainant's Submissions on Admissibility 28. The Complainant submits that the requirements for admissibility under Article 56 of the Charter have been met. 29. On the issue of exhaustion of domestic remedies in particular, the Complainant avers that the Victim cannot exhaust domestic remedies in Angola because such remedies do not meet the Commission's requirements of availability, effectiveness, and sufficiency. They cite Jawara v The Gambia, wherein the Commission held that 'the existence of a remedy must be sufficiently certain, not only in theory but also in practice, failing which, it will lack the requisite accessibility and effectiveness'. 30. The Complainant points out that the principal ex post facto remedy for the type of actions perpetrated against Mr Mendes in Angola is the investigation of the allegation of death threats and embezzlement, and, 3