Latest Articles

All years
Should South Africa's top court hear a torture dispute implicating Equatorial Guinea's vice president?
Should South Africa's top court hear a torture dispute implicating Equatorial Guinea's vice president?

Teodorin Obiang, vice president of Equatorial Guinea (EG), a country regarded as one of the most corrupt in the world, wants South Africa’s top court to halt a R70m legal claim being brought against him there. The claim, by a South African businessman, is for damages relating to his wrongful arrest and detention in EG between 2013 – 2015, under conditions so appalling that they amount to torture under international law. Obiang is asking the Constitutional Court to hear his challenge to a decision of a full bench of the high court in SA after three judges said the damages claim against him could go ahead.

New website of the Seychelles' judiciary to 'help ensure open justice'
New website of the Seychelles' judiciary to 'help ensure open justice'

The judiciary of Seychelles has launched a new website, providing access to the judgments of its courts as well as giving the judiciary a more human face. It is intended to help the public with provide resources as well as information. Everything the public needs to know about accessing legal aid, for example, can be found there, while for lawyers all the Practice Directions now become available in a single place

Angolan lawyer’s arrest, torture condemned by SADC Lawyers’ Association
Angolan lawyer’s arrest, torture condemned by SADC Lawyers’ Association

Angolan lawyers are in uproar over an incident in which one of their profession was detained, tortured and charged by police. According to a statement by the Southern African Develoment Community Lawyers' Association, the lawyer, Eugenio Marcolino, had been appearing in court when the police detained him.

Eritrea 'slave labourers' - Canada's highest court allows claim to be heard in Canada
Eritrea 'slave labourers' - Canada's highest court allows claim to be heard in Canada

In a widely-hailed new decision, Canada’s supreme court has ruled that Eritrean workers, allegedly forced by the state to provide slave labour to a Canadian-owned mine in Eritrea, may sue the mining company in the Canadian courts. Vancouver-based company, Nevsun, has been operating a mining outfit in Eritrea, using local workers. In terms of the new supreme court decision, these miners may now sue Nevsun, in Canada and under Canadian law, for the conditions under which they say they were made to work. The three Eritreans claiming against Nevsun say they worked in the mine against their will. They claim they constantly feared torture and other punishment. One of the three said he was ‘abducted at gunpoint’ from the mine, held in solitary confinement, tortured, and given electric shocks.  Apart from the impact on the workers (who must now prove their working conditions and that Nevsun was aware of these conditions) the decision is also important because it shows the highest court in Canada developing the law of that country to take account of customary international law. The court’s majority said there were no Canadian laws that conflicted with the adoption of customary international law as part of Canada’s common law. On the contrary, the government had adopted policies to ensure that ‘Canadian companies operating abroad respect these norms’. ‘In the absence of any contrary law, the customary international law norms raised by the Eritrean workers form part of the Canadian common law and potentially apply to Nevsun,’ said the court.

Indian widow’s plight ‘shocks conscience of the court’
Indian widow’s plight ‘shocks conscience of the court’

In Africa, as in India, land rights, access to and ownership of land are a major concern. It is often the most poor and vulnerable that suffer the worst when these rights are not respected. And if you are an unlettered woman, on your own, you could find yourself and your rights disappearing altogether. Take the case of Vidya Devi who lives in India’s Himachal Pradesh state. More than half a century ago, the state took her land away from her for a road – but to this day she has been paid not a cent for it, even though the state was legally obliged to pay compensation. It is cases like that this that we need to remember when marking International Women's Day.

Africa's women struggle to gain abortion rights; USA women struggle to keep them
Africa's women struggle to gain abortion rights; USA women struggle to keep them

Most African states still struggle over the right to an early, safe, legal abortion and as a result the number of women dying from illegal terminations continues to increase at an alarming rate. However, in the United States, where women thought that this right had been established decades ago, it is now under serious threat, with the principle established in Roe v Wade under systematic attack in the courts and the states' legislatures. Just last week the Supreme Court heard argument in the latest state bid to undermine that right.

Sudan: does it care a damn?
Sudan: does it care a damn?

The highest court in the United States has just heard argument in a case that could have far-reaching implications for Sudan and perhaps for other countries said to be sponsoring terrorism. It concerns amendments to a key piece of US legislation and whether these amendments could apply retroactively, in this case to Sudan. That state has withdrawn from the litigation, refusing to participate in any way. However, if the court finds the law applies, Sudan could be liable to damages running into billions of US dollars for compensation to victims of terror bombings and their families. Judgment on the question has been reserved, but in the course of argument when the matter came to the US Supreme Court last week, counsel appearing for Sudan let slip an ‘utterance’ seldom heard in such a conservative, formal environment: he said ‘damn’. A quick check shows that a member of South Africa’s highest court has gone even further, putting the word into a formal decision of that court.

Namibia's anti-graft body targets counsel from South Africa

Namibia’s Anti-Corruption Commission, already sharply censured by the high court for going beyond powers allowed it by law (see 'When the Shepherd becomes a Wolf' on this website), is now coming in for even wider criticism. This time it’s for serving a summons on counsel for the accused – in court and during a hearing related to the ‘Fishrot’ scandal that has stunned Namibia. The scandal involves allegations of international bribery and corruption for access to Namibian fishing waters. Last week, South African counsel, Tembeka Ngcukaitobi, appearing in the high court, Windhoek, on behalf of suspects in the matter, was served with a summons from the ACC demanding that he explain a payment he had received from Namibia’s national fishing corporation, Fishcor, in 2018, and given just an hour to answer. The SADC-Lawyers Association has issued a strongly worded statement on the incident, and the Namibian government has subsequently apologised to Ngcukaitobi. It is not the first time that counsel for the Fishrot accused have run into trouble with the Namibian authorities: late last year, two South African advocates were arrested, held in police cells and prevented from appearing to argue in court as they did not have the required work permits.

Kenya and Botswana: why were their recent sodomy judgments so different?
Kenya and Botswana: why were their recent sodomy judgments so different?

In this post from the website of the International Association of Constitutional Law , blogger Aditendra Singh of the National Law University, Delhi, compares two similar cases from Kenya and Botswana. He poses the question: What made the courts adjudicate the matters so differently?

When the shepherd becomes a wolf
When the shepherd becomes a wolf

Top-ranking Namibians implicated in international corruption related to the country’s lucrative fishing industry, have failed to have the search and seizure warrants issued against them set aside. Among the targets of the warrants applied for by the anti-corruption commission were the former minister of fisheries and marine resources and the former minister of justice. But the judge hearing the matter was highly critical of aspects of the commission’s behaviour. One of the complaints against the commission in relation to the warrants was that certain of the documents were ‘privileged and confidential’. The anti-corruption commission said the documents were ‘confidential but not privileged’ and there was thus no reason for them not to be seized and used in the matter – an attitude that the judge said ‘horrified’ him. The judge said it ‘boggles the mind’ that the commission did not follow the law that applied in a case where privilege was claimed. The commission’s behaviour amounted to ‘a shepherd becoming a wolf’ and in this regard, the commission’s officers acted ‘despicably’.