which has not responded to the submissions of the Complainants, has not provided any evidence that it has complied with the requirements of the provisions of Article 24 after the eviction of the Batwa people. In other words, the Commission agrees that the eviction of the Batwa from the Kahuzi-Biega Forest did not take into account the natural and cultural conditions that are likely to have a negative impact on their lives. It is clear that the alleged violation is established. On the alleged violation of Article 1 of the Charter 214. It is clear from the Commission's well-established jurisprudence that a violation of any provision of the Charter automatically implies a violation of Article 193 . lhus, for example, in the Communication Kevin Mgwnngn Gurzme und Others v. Cameroon, the Commission reiterated that a violation of any provision of the African Charter automatically constitutes a violation of Article 1 insofar as it reflects the failure of the State Party to adopt adequate measures to give effect to the provisions of the African Charter'94 . It therefore concluded that having found violations of several provisions in the course of its analysis, the Respondent State had violated Article 1"95. 215. Noting that there was a violation of a number of Articles of the Charter in this case, the Commission concludes that the DRC has therefore violated Article 1. The Commission's comments on the claims for compensation 216. The Complainants allege that they are entitled to reparation and have therefore made a number of requests for reparation. The Commission notes that the African Charter does not contain a specific provision on reparation for violations of the rights enshrined therein. However, in accordance with its jurisprudence, it notes that the violation of the rights protected by the Charter gives rise to a right for reparation. For example, in the Communication IcrmMarie Atangnnn Mebnru v. Republic of Cameroon, the Commission indicated that reparation can take various forms depending on the rights violated and the circumstances of the case, ranging from administrative, legislative and judicial actions to monetary compensation f' . °'Communicatlon 147/95149/96 5ir Dawdo K. Jawara v. The Gambia (2000) ACHPR para 46 so Communication 266/03 Kevin Mwanga Gunman et al v. Cameroon (2009) ACHPR para 213 3"* i"...:." ,.allllr /, \ ., 95 bid £g\\£1II r . S ? 96 Communication 416/12 Jean-Marie Atangana Mebara v/ Republic of Cameroon (2015) ACHPR para " . " I . ( 46 . /1=._, to ., 1 . Cr 'f g . g J. n \ . `?:n, x 1 . .of ..3 *W \ "\ . P . . if ,al