|
Title
|
Jurisdiction |
Date
|
The Complainant alleges that the Respondent State has violated Articles l, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 14, 15, 17, 19, 60 and 61 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights. |
 African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
The Complainant alleges that the Respondent State has violated Articles l, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 14, 15, 17, 19, 60 and 61 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights. |
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
The Complainant alleges that the Respondent State has violated Articles l, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 14, 15, 17, 19, 60 and 61 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights. |
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
The Complainant alleges that the Respondent State has violated Articles l, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 14, 15, 17, 19, 60 and 61 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights. |
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
A complaint alleging human rights violations was struck out for failure to prosecute and non-compliance with procedural requirements.
African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights – Admissibility – Diligent prosecution – Striking out of communication for failure to prosecute – Rules of procedure – Extension of time for submissions.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
The Commission struck out the communication due to the complainant's failure to prosecute the case diligently within time limits.
African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights – communication procedure – admissibility – striking out for want of diligent prosecution – failure to submit required submissions within prescribed time despite extensions.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
Complaint struck out for lack of diligent prosecution after complainant failed to submit required admissibility arguments.
African Charter – admissibility – non-compliance with procedural requirements – strike out for want of diligent prosecution – failure to submit admissibility arguments within extended deadlines.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
Where a complainant fails to submit admissibility arguments or engage with the process, the African Commission will strike out the communication.
African Commission procedure – striking out communication – failure by complainant to submit arguments on admissibility – lack of diligent prosecution – Rule 105(1), Rule 113, Rules of Procedure.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
A communication was struck out due to the complainant's failure to prosecute and comply with procedural requirements on admissibility.
African Charter – procedure – admissibility – failure to prosecute complaint – communication struck out for lack of diligent prosecution.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
A complaint was struck out by the Commission due to the complainant's failure to pursue it with due diligence.
African Commission procedure – Diligent prosecution – Striking out of communication for failure to submit required arguments on admissibility within prescribed timing – Failure to respond to Commission correspondence.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
28 April 2018 |
|
Legal requirement to declare only state-recognised religions on identification documents violates rights to equality and freedom of religion.
Human rights – Freedom of religion – Discrimination – Forum internum and forum externum – Equality – State reservations to treaties – Neutral legal recognition and documentation of marriages of unrecognised religious minorities – Requirement to declare one's religion.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
28 April 2018 |
|
State refusal to recognize the Baha’i faith in official documents and marriages breaches Charter rights to non-discrimination and religious freedom.
Human rights law – freedom of religion – discrimination – non-recognition of Baha’i faith in official documents – denial of documentation – reservation to Article 8 of the African Charter – equal protection – state obligation to provide neutral law for marriage recognition – compensation for past violations.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
28 April 2018 |
|
The Commission found Egypt violated religious minorities’ rights by denying Baha’is civil documentation and marriage recognition, ordering compensation and reform.
Human rights – African Charter – right to equality and non-discrimination (Articles 2 and 3); freedom of religion (Article 8); discrimination based on religion; state obligation to provide legal recognition for all religious minorities; effect of reservations to the Charter; remedy and compensation for past discrimination.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
28 April 2018 |
