ACHPR African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights application for eviction; and (iii) eviction of the Complainants in the Human Rights our Collective Responsibility I is currently only a pending case for r.."'\;:><:: ....11"'. courts. I dithat it is unclear what the basis of 45. The Respondent State, therefore, the complaint is, or when the alleged of the African Charter arose. The Government also argued that the examine the Communication on the for an eviction of the Complainants in have no shelter, or that if the V.1.L·"u.•.J.VIIto live in unacceptable circumstances, scenario, the alleged violation of the on the outcome of the South African Court that the Commission lacks the jurisdiction to 46. In addition, the Respondent State in bringing the communication act as a "supra-national court already been decided by communication domestic level, and law, and does not African Charter Charter. 47. F of Article 56(2), the Respondent State addressed to a State Party to the 48. if, in due course, an eviction order is the question still remains which right violated, as the African Charter does 49. ent Statefurther argued rely on thei \\f;1,"ent allegedly complaint, sgcK an application has African courts, as a result of which Communication on a cause of action domestic courts. It further argues that rely on their eviction or on their u.J.J.'~r.."''-' remedies are available to them. 50. The Respondent State also raised Commission on the basis that the remedies as required under Article