CRPD/C/20/D/23/2014 application is composed of three judges. The constitutional petition was submitted with the support of the Legal and Human Rights Centre, the Tanzania Albino Society and the Tanzania Federation of Disabled People’s Organizations, and more than six years later the matter has still not been heard. The author argues that this procedure usually leads to undue delay, because the limited number of judges in many regional branches of the High Court complicates the bringing together of judges to form the bench. The matter has therefore been unduly delayed and prolonged,21 and the High court could therefore not be considered as an available domestic remedy for the author. 5.9 The author reiterates that since the year 2000 there has been an increase in the number and scale of attacks on persons with albinism in the United Republic of Tanzania, many of which remain unreported. He also submits that the State party has been unable to prosecute the cases reported by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights so far,22 and that the judicial system in the United Republic of Tanzania is ill-equipped to handle the high number of cases related to persons with albinism. 23 The author refers to the jurisprudence of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, according to which in the case of “massive” and “serious” violations of human rights, a State is aware of such violations and it is expected to take appropriate actions to prevent them.24 The author submits that, regarding the present case, the State was notified of the grave violations of human rights he had suffered, but it failed to take the necessary steps to investigate the case, prosecute and punish the perpetrators, and prevent further similar acts of violence against persons with albinism in the United Republic of Tanzania. 5.10 The author submits that a remedy is considered available only if it is accessible in theory and in practice25 and can be pursued without any impediment. 26 Domestic remedies are also said to be effective when they offer some prospects of success, such as redress for the alleged violations. In cases of serious violations, such as violations of the right to life, or torture, purely administrative or disciplinary proceedings cannot be claimed to be sufficient or effective. 27 Remedies must then be of a judicial nature, and States should be able to establish the criminal responsibilities of the culprits. The author also refers to the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights according to which applicants do not need to exhaust domestic remedies “where an administrative practice consisting of a repetition of acts incompatible with the Convention and official tolerance by State authorities has been shown to exist, and is of such a nature as to make proceedings futile or ineffective”.28 5.11 The author therefore considers that, in the particular circumstances of his case, the local remedies to redress the violation in the State party are unavailable, and even if considered available, they are undeniably ineffective and insufficient. 29 He therefore requests the Committee to examine the case on the merits, reiterating that the acts that he has been a victim of, and the fact that those acts have not been investigated, which has resulted in non-prosecution of those responsible and left them in total impunity, amount to a violation of his rights under articles 4, 5, 7, 8, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 24 of the Convention. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Association of Victims of Post-Electoral Violence and INTERIGHTS v. Cameroon, para. 63. The author refers to A/HRC/28/75. The author refers to cases that had been reported by 2014 only, at the time of his submission to the Committee. He refers to the example of a 1-year-old albino boy who was abducted from his home in the north-west of the country in January 2015 and was found murdered with his arms and legs hacked off. The victim, Yohana Bahati, was kidnapped from his family home in Geita Region by an armed gang. His mother, Esther, was struck with a machete as she tried to protect him. See African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, World Organisation Against Torture et al. v. Zaire (mass violation case), communication Nos. 25/89, 47/90, 56/91 and 100/93. See European Court of Human Rights, Akdivar and others v. Turkey (application No. 21893/93), judgment of 16 September 1996, para. 66. Jawara v. Gambia, para. 32. Vicente et al. v. Colombia, para. 5.2. Akdivar and others v. Turkey, para. 67. See European Court of Human Rights, D.H. and others v. Czech Republic (application No. 57325/00), judgment of 13 November 2007, paras. 116–122. 7