Regional systems 97 truth of media reports independently, where possible. Local remedies must have been exhausted prior to submission of the communication, unless the national procedures are inadequate or unduly prolonged. The Commission has stressed that theoretically available remedies must, in fact, be available, effective and sufficient. “A remedy is considered available if the petitioner can pursue it without impediment, it is deemed effective if it offers a prospect of success, and it is found sufficient if it is capable of redressing the complaint.”119 • The Commission distinguishes between cases in which the complaint deals with violations against identified individual victims and those alleging widespread violations in which it may be impossible for the complainants to identify all the victims. In the latter case, there is no need to exhaust domestic remedies. “The Commission does not believe that the condition that internal remedies must have been exhausted can be applied literally to those cases in which it is ‘neither practicable nor desirable’ for the complainants or the victims to pursue such internal channels of remedy in every case of violation of human rights. Such is the case where there are many victims.”120 • The communication must be submitted “within a reasonable period from the time local remedies are exhausted or from the date the Commission is seized of the matter.” The Commission has not yet rejected a communication for being submitted too late, and it once declared a communication admissible that was initiated after more than 16 years of fruitless domestic proceedings. • The Commission will not admit cases that have been settled by the State(s) involved in some other manner. However, this provision applies only if the settlement concerns the same parties and the same facts as those before the Commission. Investigation and decisions on the merits All communications received by the Secretariat are transmitted to the Commission, which determines whether or not to consider a communication, based on the above criteria. While article 55 empowers a simple majority of the Commission to make that determination, in practice the Commission usually acts by consensus. The Commission will inform the applicant if it does not take up a case. Individual communications are confidential and are examined in closed sessions. The Commission does not always distinguish clearly between admissibility and action on the merits, but the State concerned is given the opportunity to respond to the allegations prior to the Commission’s deliberations; the complainant may then reply in writing to the State’s response. If the State does not respond or does not contest the allegations, the Commission decides whether or not to accept the allegations as true based on the evidence before it and on any other information that the Commission may acquire during its investigation. If the applicant ceases to communicate with the Commission, the Commission may treat that silence as a wish to withdraw the communication. However, the Commission will try to establish whether the silence is indicative of a lack of interest or whether it reflects circumstances beyond the person’s control that prevent him or her from pursuing the application. Article 46 of the Charter gives the Commission broad authority to “resort to any appropriate method of investigation” in the course of its work. The Commission normally invites all the parties to attend or be represented at a hearing on the merits of those cases that have been declared Communications Nos. 147/95 and 149/96, Dawda Jawara v. The Gambia (2000). 119 Communications Nos. 54/91, 61/91, 98/93, 164/97-196/97 and 210/98, Malawi African Association and Others v. Mauritania (2000). 120