55. The Complainants also submit that they have not submitted this Complaint to any other procedure of international investigation or settlement. 56. As far as Article 56(5) is concerned, they submit that on 10 June 2004, the Complainants filed a lawsuit before the Court of Administrative Justice against the Minister of Interior and the President of the Ministry of Interior’s Civil Status Department (CSD) which is responsible for issuing official identification documents. The lawsuit named the Complainants in their individual capacity and in their capacity as guardians of their daughters. 57. The Complainants submit that during the lawsuit, they asked the Minister of Interior and the CSD to issue ID cards to them, new birth certificates for their daughters, and that their Baha’i faith be recognized in those documents which require applicants to mention their religious affiliation. 58. The Court of Administrative Justice gave a decision on 4 April 2006, in favour of the plaintiffs and ordered the CSD to grant the documents requested by the Complainants. The Government decided to appeal the decision and on 15 May 2006, the Appeals Inspection Chamber of the Supreme Administrative Court (SAC) declared the Government’s appeal admissible. The SAC also granted the Government’s request to suspend the implementation of the lower court’s ruling before the appeal. 59. The Complainants submit that, the SAC further overturned the lower court’s decision on 16 December 2006, and found that the State is under no obligation to issue ID cards or birth certificates recognizing the Baha’i faith. They further submit that the Ezzat case is final and cannot be appealed before any other Court within the Respondent State. 60. The Complainants further draw the attention of the Commission to the decisions of the Lower Court of Administrative Justice on 29 January 2008 in the cases between Rauf Hindi Halim v Minister of Interior and Others and Hosni Abdel-Massih v Minister of the Interior and Others which are similar to the issues raised by the Complainants. In those cases, the Lower Court ruled that the Baha’i applicants were able to obtain certificates and identity documents that did not indicate any religious affiliation, but did not find that the identity documents could state their religion as Baha’i. 61. The Complainants aver that, firstly, the decision in the cases above should have no bearing on the admissibility of their case because the Commission and other international bodies generally consider the effectiveness of domestic remedy by reference to the state of the national law at the date the violation occurred. They submit that, at the time they applied for identity documents, they were legally required to 8