CCPR/C/112/D/2325/2013 claims that the number of detention warrants against him and the number of cases assigned to hand-picked judges enable the State party to keep him in detention in order to divest him of his rights over DevHope.com. 5.8 The author repeats his arguments regarding the violation of his right to health and recalls the steps he has taken with the authorities to secure his repatriation. In addition, he indicates that he filed another habeas corpus petition on 7 March 2014, based solely on grounds of the violation of his right to health, as a form of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment, with a view to his immediate release. Given that it is an emergency measure, he laments the fact that the Douala tribunal de grande instance has yet to rule on the petition, one month after it was filed. The author repeats his comments regarding the violation of article 11, to the effect that the charges laid against him by the Cameroonian authorities, especially for fraud, were deliberately arbitrary in order to support the legal conspiracy against him. He repeats that he is also the victim of a miscarriage of justice, in violation of articles 14, paragraph 1, and 15, paragraph 1, and thus considers that all the judicial actions of the authorities are void under national and international law and constitute a violation of article 14, paragraph 1, of the Covenant. 5.9 Lastly, the author describes the outcome of the proceedings in the case brought by Mr. Kengoum, explaining that, despite his health and his motion of 21 March 2014 to postpone the deliberations of the Douala tribunal de grande instance and to reopen the proceedings, he was sentenced in absentia on 26 March 2014 to 18 months in prison and a fine of 75 million CFA francs, without his witnesses being heard or his lawyers being allowed to plead his case. As a result of this conviction, he can no longer request release on bail. Additional information submitted by the author 6.1 On 23 May 2014, the author submitted additional information on admissibility and an update on the pending criminal cases. He accuses the State party of bad faith in the context of this communication and repeats his allegations concerning violations of articles 6, paragraph 1, and 7, of the Covenant. The author also alleges a violation of his rights under the preamble and articles 1, 2, 4, paragraph 2, and 5, paragraph 2, of the Covenant. 6.2 Regarding the exhaustion of domestic remedies, he maintains that domestic remedies could not possibly be effective given that the State party is using the courts for extrajudicial purposes. He repeats that, with regard to habeas corpus, the Supreme Court was neither an accessible nor an effective remedy. 6.3 The author indicates that, on 2 May 2014, he was sentenced to 2 years in prison in the case brought by the French company Logis SA, despite his motion of 23 April 2014 to postpone the hearing and his motion of 29 April 2014 to have the judge removed. He appealed his conviction on 12 May 2014. The author criticizes the fact that he has not yet received the written decision in either of the two cases in which he has been convicted. 6.4 The Ministry of Public Health ordered an expert medical examination to determine a course of treatment. The examination took place on 12 May 2014, confirming previous assessments of the author’s visual problems and hemiplegia and recommending that, as a precautionary measure, the author should receive care in an adequately equipped hospital. State party’s additional observations 7.1 The State party submitted additional observations on 19 August 2014, in response to the comments provided by the author. The State party reiterates its arguments concerning the inadmissibility of the communication. GE.14-23228 (E) 13