Commission in Communications Nos. 127/94 and 198197, in the Matter of Sana Dumbuya v. The Gambia and SOS Esc/aves v. Mauritania. 88.1n conclusion, the Respondent State prays the Court to rule that the Applicant has not exhausted the aforementioned local remedies and, therefore, declare the Application inadmissible. 89. Concerning the unconstitutionality of the impugned law, the Applicant contends that, according to Article 77(2) of the lvorian Constitution, human rights advocacy associations may refer to the Council only the laws relating to public freedoms; that given that the impugned law is a law governing an independent administrative authority, no remedy is open to non-governmental organizations and individuals to solicit the withdrawal or review of such a law. 90.1n its additional observations, the Applicant further contends that, according to Article 77 of the lvorian Constitution, the Constitutional Council should be seized only prior to promulgation of laws; that even if the Applicant were entitled to seize the Constitutional Council, it would be necessary that the Applicant be informed of the adoption of such a law by the National Assembly. 91.1t maintains that, in Cote d'lvoire, the only means by which the existence of a law is brought to the attention of the citizens, is the publication thereof in an Official Gazette after its promulgation; that, in the circumstances, it would be impossible for human rights associations to seize the Constitutional Council prior to promulgation of the laws as required by the Constitution. 92. The Applicant made no observation on the competence of the administrative jurisdictions suggested by the Respondent State. 22