|
Title
|
Jurisdiction |
Date
|
|
Constitutional law — Fundamental rights — Equality before the law — Article 10 of the Constitution — Article 8 of the Constitution — Right to dignity — Same-sex relationships — Homosexuality — Criminal law — Common Law Sexual Offences — Sodomy — Unnatural sexual offences — Various forms of sexual conduct committed by a male person with another male person are not regarded as criminal, if committed by a male person with a female person — Differentiation which the impugned laws accord to homosexual men amounts to unfair discrimination and thus unconstitutional
|
Namibia
|
21 June 2024 |
|
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 |
|
The Complainants allege violation of Articles l, 2, 3, 4, 5, 19, 60 and 61 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
The Complainants allege violation of Articles l, 2, 3, 4, 5, 19, 60 and 61 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
The Complainants allege violation of Articles l, 2, 3, 4, 5, 19, 60 and 61 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
The Complainants allege violation of Articles l, 2, 3, 4, 5, 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 |
|
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)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
A complaint was declared inadmissible for failing to meet language and exhaustion of remedies requirements under the African Charter.
African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights – Admissibility – Use of disparaging language – Exhaustion of local remedies – Undue prolongation – Inadmissibility due to non-compliance with admissibility requirements under Article 56.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
A complaint was declared inadmissible for failing to exhaust local remedies and for use of disparaging language against the judiciary.
African Charter – Admissibility – exhaustion of local remedies – disparaging language – requirements under Article 56 – inadmissibility of communication for non-compliance with admissibility criteria.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
Communication was declared inadmissible for failure to exhaust local remedies and for use of disparaging language against the judiciary.
Admissibility of communications – African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, Article 56 – prerequisites for admissibility – exhaustion of local remedies – non-use of disparaging language – assessment of effective and sufficient remedy – requirement for substantiated allegations and reasonable period for submission.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
The Commission struck out the complaint for lack of diligent prosecution due to non-submission of admissibility arguments.
Human Rights – African Commission procedure – Admissibility – Diligent prosecution – Complaint struck out for failure to submit on admissibility within extended deadlines.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
A complaint alleging gross human rights violations was struck out due to the complainant's failure to prosecute the case diligently.
African Commission – Communication procedure – Diligent prosecution – Admissibility – Failure to submit on admissibility – Striking out of communication
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
A communication was struck out for lack of diligent prosecution following failure to submit admissibility arguments as required.
Human rights – African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights – admissibility – procedural default – communication struck out for want of diligent prosecution.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
17 October 2018 |
|
Selective denial of amnesty violated equal protection and fair trial rights; Uganda ordered to compensate for Charter breaches.
Human rights – Right to equal protection of the law – Grant of amnesty – Selective denial of amnesty – Right to a fair trial – Reasoned judgment – Delay in judicial proceedings – Interpretation and application of amnesty laws post-conflict – African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Articles 3, 7(1)(a) and (d).
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
17 October 2018 |
|
Refusal to grant amnesty to a former combatant, when others similarly situated were granted amnesty, violated equal protection rights under the Charter.
Human rights – amnesty for former combatants – right to equal protection of the law – fair trial – prohibition of discrimination in application of amnesty law – prolonged detention and judicial delay – obligation of reasoned judicial decisions – concurrent application of international humanitarian law and the African Charter.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
17 October 2018 |
|
State’s arbitrary denial of amnesty and delay in judicial proceedings violated equal protection and fair trial rights under the African Charter.
Human rights – African Charter – Equality before the law – Selective application of amnesty – Fair trial rights – Judicial delays – Right to compensation
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
17 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 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
27 April 2018 |
|
The Commission dismissed the complaint on res judicata grounds, reaffirming prior orders for Eritrea to end incommunicado journalist detention.
African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights – res judicata – admissibility of communications – impartiality and bias – confidentiality – incommunicado detention – state obligations – Commission powers and legal mandate – politicisation of proceedings.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
27 April 2018 |
|
A complaint against Eritrea was dismissed on grounds of res judicata, as the matter was previously determined by the Commission.
Human rights – African Charter – admissibility – res judicata – bias – confidentiality – politicization – incommunicado detention – press freedom – enforcement of previous decisions.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
27 April 2018 |
|
The Commission dismissed the case as res judicata, reaffirming Eritrea's duty to implement previous orders regarding detained journalists.
African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights – preliminary objection – res judicata – communications previously adjudicated – alleged bias – breach of confidentiality – politicisation – Commission’s mandate and functions – non-implementation of prior decisions – reaffirmation of earlier recommendations.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
27 April 2018 |
|
|
Zimbabwe
|
15 June 2016 |
|
|
Zimbabwe
|
15 June 2016 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
29 November 2013 |
|
EALA election rules must substantively comply with Article 50(1); consultations cannot undermine proper representation or the electoral process.
Regional integration law – East African Community – EALA elections – Legality and consistency of national rules for EALA elections with Article 50(1) of the Treaty – Jurisdiction of the East African Court of Justice – Remedies for non-conformity – Interpretation of requirements for representation of political parties, genders, and special groups in EALA.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
29 November 2013 |
|
The East African Court of Justice ordered amendment of Uganda's EALA election rules to conform with Article 50(1) of the EAC Treaty.
Regional integration law – Treaty interpretation – Rules of Procedure for election to EALA – Consistency with Article 50(1) of the EAC Treaty – Jurisdiction of East African Court of Justice – Role of national law in electoral rules gazettement – Electoral process consultation and consensus requirements.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
29 November 2013 |
|
|
Namibia
|
30 July 2012 |
|
Human rights and fundamental freedoms – unlawful Sterilisation – doctrine of informed consent - the required consent must be given freely and voluntarily and should not have been induced by fear, fraud or force - such consent must also be clear and unequivocal – the lack of informed consent amounts to an assault
|
Namibia
|
30 July 2012 |
