Communication alleges ongoing violations which, allegedly, are still occurring and affecting children in the Respondent State. Therefore, the Committee finds that the Communication has been submitted is in line with the requirement of ‘reasonable time’. 27. The sixth and last condition for admissibility relates to the language used in the Communication as provided under Section IX (1) (f) of the Communications Guidelines, which stipulates that a Communication should not contain any disparaging or insulting language. The Committee observes that the Communication does not contain any disparaging or insulting language and is presented decently. 28. In light of the foregoing, the Committee concludes that the current Communication fulfils all the admissibility requirements set forth under Article 44 of the Charter and Section IX(1) of the Communications Guidelines. The Committee, therefore, declares the Communication admissible. V. Submission on the Mertis of the Communication The Complainants’ Submission on the Merit 29. The Complainants allege that children accused of witchcraft are subject to killings in the process of extracting confession or purportedly delivering from alleged spiritual possession. They cite examples of cases where children have been beheaded, buried alive, detained and beaten and where acids have been poured on them due to accusation of witchcraft which caused their unfortunate death. Particularly, the Complainants refer to the case of Master Efiong Lawson, who was allegedly beheaded by his stepfather, Mr Felix, and submit that, despite the presence of law enforcement at the scene and the initial arrest of the perpetrator, no effective investigation or prosecution was undertaken. The failure of the State to show due diligence in the investigation and prosecution of perpetrators of killings of children accused of witchcrafts, according to the Complainants, amounts to a violation of the right to life by the Respondent State. In support of this claim, the Complainants cite case law from the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights in the Zimbabwe Human Rights Forum v Zimbabwe and Mouvement ivoirien des droits humains v Cote d’Ivoire where the Commission held that negligence in protecting the rights and addressing violations results in violation of the Charter attributable to the State. 30. Moreover, the Complainants submit that the Respondent State has failed to fulfil its obligation to ensure, to the maximum extent possible, the right to survival, protection and development of children accused of witchcraft. They argue that survival includes the right to live and to have adequate standard of living; protection includes freedom from all forms of abuse and exploitation; and development includes the right to receive care during early childhood and social security. Accordingly, the failure of the Respondent State to prevent and punish witchcraft accusation is a violation of the obligation to ensure the survival, protection, and development of children. 9