Human Rights our Collective Responsibility were no military laws that allow for the practice of forced genital examination and virginity testing in the first place. 28. The Complainants submitted that following this decision, there were no further remedies to exhaust, given that the decision of the Supreme Military Court which acquitted Dr EI-Mogy of all charges could only be appealed before the Supreme Court of Military Appeals, which only receive and entertain appeals by the military prosecutor or the convicted person, but not the victims. 29. The Complainants further submitted that an appeal needed to be made within 60 days of the ratification of the decision of the Supreme Military Court. The Complainants point out that the decision of the Supreme Military Court in the First Victim's case was ratified by General al-Rowaini on 1 April 2012 and that the military prosecutor choose not to appeal the decision of the supreme military Court. 30. The Complainants contended that Article 49 of the Code of Military Justice prohibited Complainants from advancing civil claims before military courts or attaching civil claims to cases being considered by military courts. The Complainants further stated that the code also prohibits Complainants from filing claims before an ordinary court with criminal proceeding~ being considered by the military court until the military court has issued its decision on the criminal aspect of the claim. They contended that since the military court acquitted Dr El-Mogy (their alleged assailant) of all charges, neither the First ;Victim nor any other victim could bring any civil claim before any court, military or ordinary. 31. The Complainants, therefore, concluded that all available local remedies were exhausted in respect of the First Victim. 32. Concerning the Second Victim, the Complainants aver that local remedies have been unduly prolonged on one hand and unavailable, ineffective and insufficient on the other. The Complainants explained that the Second Victim filed a claim with the ordinary public prosecutor on 4 July 2011, in which she described the abuses she suffered in the military prison. In compliance with the provisions of the Code of Military Justice which vests exclusive jurisdiction over complaints against members of the military on the military justice system, the ordinary prosecutor transferred the matter to the military prosecutor on 5 September 2011. 33. The African Commission on