Original: French the Application instituting proceedings , it cites Articles 33, 176 and 177. The Applicant further maintains that the first year of Mr. Kadhafi 's detention was governed by the laws in force before the people's court which were declared unconstitutional. According to the said laws, the State Prosecutor could unilaterally extend the period of detention without the prior authorisation of a judge. It was only after a year in detention that the laws prescribed in the Libyan Penal Code were accessibility and made available. effectiveness of However, in the said practice, the measures were questionable. 67. In paragraph 82.1 of its Judgment of 14 June 2013, in the Matter of Consolidated Applications 00912011 Tanganyika Law Society and the Legal and Human Rights Centre and 01112011 Reverend Christopher R. Mtikila v. The United Republic of Tanzania, the Court held that the local remedies to be exhausted prior to bringing a case before it are primarily judicial remedies which are the only ones that meet the criteria of availability, effectiveness and sufficiency. Furthermore, "a remedy IS considered available if the complainant can pursue it without impediment." In the same vein, in the Matter of Application 013/2011 the Beneficiaries of Late Norbert Zongo and Others v. Burkina Faso, Judgment of 28 March 2014, paragraph 68, the Court held that an effective remedy refers to "that which produces the expected result, and hence, the effectiveness of a remedy is therefore measured in terms of its ability to solve a problem raised by the Applicant". 68. It is obvious from the facts of the case that the secret detention , isolation by the revolutionary brigade, the fact of not having access to a counsel or to a judge during the procedures for extension of his detention