Tokens: We
are
not
sure
whether
the
Court
was
correct
when
,
in
its
admissibility
decision
of
10
March
2005
,
it
observed
that
since
neither
of
the
above
-
mentioned
procedures
had
been
available
to
the
applicant
in
that
he
could
not
launch
them
himself
,
they
could
not
be
considered
as
remedies
to
be
exhausted
before
bringing
the
case
to
the
Court
.
The
existing
remedies
may
have
not
been
perfect
,
but
they
were
in
place
and
did
work
in
the
case
of
the
second
candidate
to
paternity
,
and
it
is
not
for
the
Court
to
speculate
on
how
they
would
have
worked
in
the
case
of
the
applicant
.
The
applicant
was
a
victim
of
his
own
indecisiveness
.
The
State
can
not
be
held
responsible
for
his
lack
of
action
.
Labels: O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O