The Complainants' Submission on Admissibility 28. The Complainants submit that the instant Communication satisfies all the requirements for Admissibility as outlined in Article 56 of the African Charter and present arguments in support of this submission. 29. On Article 56 (1) of the African Charter, the Complainants aver that Ms. Senate Masupha (the principal victim of the alleged violations), FIDA-Lesotho and SALC, are the authors of the present Communication and identified accordingly. They state that the Complaint contains full physical and mailing addresses of all the authors. They further clarify that neither the principal victim nor the authors of the Communicatiqn have requested anonymity. 30. The Complainants submit that the Communication is compatible with the Constitutive Act of the African Union and the African Charter, as prescribed by Article 56(2) of the African Charter. They submit that the Communication alleges violations of specifically enumerated provisions of the African Charter and the Maputo Protocol by Lesotho, which occurred during the ··period of application of these instruments within the territorial sphere of the Kingdom of Lesotho. They argue that they are competent to bring this Communication under Article 55 of ·the African ~harter, which they claim enables natural persons or individuals and NGO's to file Complaints alleging human rights violations before the Commission.. · 31. On Article 56(3) of the African Charter, th~ Complainants submit that the Communicati.o n is wiitten in professipnal and respectful language detailing the factual and legal bases for their allegations. 32. Concerning Article 56(4) of the African Charter, the Complainants submit that the Communication is not based exclusively on news disseminated through the mass media. The Complainants argue that the allegations proffered herein are substantiated through eyewitness testimony, court proceedings, official public documents an~:htatutes attached to the Complaint. 33. On the exhaustion of local remedies, the Complainants submit that the Communication adheres to the requirement of Article 56(5) of the African Charter as all remedies falling within the domain of 'local remedies' have been duly exhausted. In support of this submission, the Complainants argue that after becoming aw<:1,re of the court proceedings in the Magistrates Court, the First Complainant applied to intervene as an interested party, but her application was dismissed on the ground that women had no direct and substantial interest in chieftaincy succession matters under Lesotho law. Following the dismissal, the First Complainant claims to have filed ,,. .. , .,. ,;, application in the High Court of Lesotho, exercising its jurisdic;,t"~ '"c;ls:- ifflE!½,:;~, Constitutional Court in which she argued; inter alia that secti0' ._,'~10 ~ "'~ tr~ ~) ~.fd ~t ~4.i u~ 'Q (, '1-.q J1 ,;, , ~ . ~<;, +o, ~/CAtN!c O ((,,<:, -,,.~ ft-0 ''/:Ero~