accordance with the law. It further argued that the criteria of fair trial adopted by the international agreements on human rights were observed, and therefore, it is obvious from the above and from the records of the proceedings of the court trials that two lawyers appeared during all the hearings together with the first and the second accused persons and four lawyers representing the third complainant. 203. From the submissions of the Respondent State, the African Commission of the view that the Respondent State does not appreciate the importance of an independent tribunal, especially one that is responsible for trying victims charged with capital offences. The African Commission therefore reiterates that the essence of a higher tribunal is that, it affords the victims the opportunity to have their case re-examined on both law and facts by a judicial body. In this way the decision of the court below can be tested. The omission of the opportunity of such an appeal therefore greatly deprives the victims of due process. 204. In this regard the African Commission also wishes to make reference to the UN Basic Principle on the Independence of the Judiciary. Those principles provide that every one shall have the right to be tried by the ordinary courts or tribunals using established procedures. Tribunals that do not use the duly established procedures of the legal process shall not be created to displace the jurisdiction belonging to the ordinary courts or judicial tribunals. Therefore, it is the view of the African Commission that a tribunal cannot be said to be independent when the implementation of its decision squarely vests on the executive branch of the Government, in this case the Head of State. This has completely defeated the criteria envisaged in a democratic state. 205. In Civil Liberties Organisation, and Others v Nigeria120, the African Commission held that „the foreclosure of any avenue of appeal to competent 120 Communication 218/98 - Civil Liberties Organisation and Others v Nigeria, para 33 62