th 43. Communication 96/93 was submitted on 12 March 1993 by Ms. Sarr Diop, on behalf of the victims. th 44. The Commission was seized of it at its 13 Session held in April 1993. Notification of it was sent to the accused state, asking it to forward its observations to the Secretariat. No response was received. th 45. At the 15 Session held in March 1994, it was decided to combine all the communications filed against Mauritania. 46. From that date, the procedure for the present communication became identical to that for the above-mentioned communication 54/91. 47. Communication 98/93 was submitted on 30 March 1993 by two NGOs, Rencontre africaine pour la défense des droits de l’Homme (RADDHO, African Association for the Defence of Human Rights) and Union interafricaine des droits de l’Homme(UIDH, Inter-African Human Rights Union). th 48. The Commission was seized of [it] at its 13 Session. 49. On 12 April 1993, notification of it was sent to the accused State, asking it to address its observations to the Secretariat of the Commission. th 50. At the 15 Session held in March 1994, it was decided to combine all the communications filed against Mauritania. 51. From that date, the procedure for the present communication became identical to that for the above-mentioned communication 54/91. nd 52. At the 22 Session held in Banjul, from 2-11 November 1997, the representative of Mauritania pointed out that his government was in the process of considering the mission report of the rd Commission and expected to have its observations ready before the 23 Session. The Commission thus decided to defer consideration of all the communications filed against Mauritania to its following session, while bearing in mind that they had been pending before the Commission for quite a long time now. rd th 53. At the 23 Session held in Banjul (The Gambia), from 20-29 April 1998, the Commission decided to combine it with the procedure ongoing for communications 164/97 to 196/97 as well as th th communication 210/98. In addition, three Notes Verbales were addressed on 25 April and 9 and th 10 July 1998, respectively, to the Mauritanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, to inquire about the government’s reaction. They have remained without reply to date. 54. Communications 164/97-196/97 allege that between September and December 1990, there was a wave of arrests in Mauritania directed at specific sectors of the population. Those arrested were mostly military men and public servants belonging to the Hal-Pulaar ethnic group and other ethnic groups from the South of the country. Sometime after this wave of arrests, the government announced, without providing any proof, that there had been an attempted coup d’état. 55. The accused were never brought before a court of law; according to communications 164/97196/97, about a dozen of the accused were tortured and executed in the military camps of Inal, J’réida, Tiguint and Aleg between November and December 1990. Most remarkably, most of the communications allege that the victims were beaten to death. 56. The widows and mothers behind the present communications, have previously brought their complaints before the Mauritanian national authorities, both civilian and military, in particular the Minister of Interior, the head of the national army, the National Assembly, the Senate, the Special Court of Justice, the Nouakchott Criminal Court, the President and the Minister of National Defence. In all these cases they were either ignored or chased away. th 57. On 14 June 1993, the Mauritanian government issued an enactment, No. 023 93, granting amnesty to those accused of perpetrating the series of murders for which the beneficiaries of the victims are hereby claiming compensation of injuries suffered. Provisions of the Charter alleged to have been violated 58. The communications allege a series of grave and massive violations of Articles 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 16 and 26 of the African Charter.