regard, that the promulgation of a law adopted in the course of this trial, setting out more lenient penalties, was delayed, and then finally authorized immediately after judgment was delivered by the military court. The Complainants further aver that as enforcement measures had been abrogated, the afore-mentioned sentences could no longer be passed without violating the provisions of Article 7(2) of the African Charter. 56. The Complainants further submit that the fact that they were deprived of contact with their families during the entire period of detention is a violation of the rights guaranteed by Article 18 (1) of the African Charter. 57. Finally, the Complainants cite, among other allegations, the provisions of Article 9 (2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to buttress the argument that, since they were not informed about the reasons for their arrest and the charges brought against them, their rights have been violated. Similarly, they denounce the decision of the judicial authorities to keep them in detention as arbitrary in spite of the amnesty law which clearly applied to their case. The Commission’s analyses on the merits 58. Prior to considering the submissions on the merits, the Commission notes that between 25 June 2005 and 25 November 2012, to be precise, for seven (7) years, it gave the Respondent State several opportunities to respond to the allegations of the Complainants. As no response was forthcoming from the State, the Commission decided to take this decision based on the facts in its possession in line with the Commission’s practice.5 59. Regarding reference to the provisions of other international conventions and domestic law of the Respondent State by the Complainants, the Commission notes that the control of the Respondent State’s actions in terms of compliance with those standards is not within its purview. The related submissions will therefore not be considered as part of the merits. However, where necessary, the Commission will automatically refer to the relevant and corresponding provisions of the African Charter in case the alleged violations are substantiated. Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa v. Angola Communication 292/04 (2008) AHRLR 43 (ACHPR 2008) para 34. Social and Economic Rights Action Center, Center for Economic and Social Rights v. Federal Republic of Nigeria Communication 155/96 (2001) AHRLR 60 (ACHPR 2001) and Union Interafricaine des Droits de l’Homme et al v. Angola Communication 159/96 (2000) RADH 20 (ACHPR 1997). 5 11