|
Title
|
Jurisdiction |
Date
|
|
|
Tanzania
|
19 December 2022 |
|
Human rights and fundamental freedoms - right to privacy, freedom from torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment Human rights and fundamental freedoms - the right of prisoners to humane living conditions and dignified treatment - the right to consent and privacy in HIV and AIDS testing
|
Tanzania
|
19 December 2022 |
|
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)
|
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)
|
17 October 2018 |
|
A complaint was struck out for failure to submit admissibility arguments and for lack of diligent prosecution.
African Charter communications – failure to comply with procedural requirements – admissibility – failure to diligently prosecute – communication struck out for want of prosecution.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
17 October 2018 |
|
Communication struck out for want of prosecution due to complainant’s failure to make required admissibility submissions.
Human rights – procedure – communications before the African Commission – admissibility – failure to make submissions or respond to correspondence – communication struck out for lack of diligent prosecution.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
17 October 2018 |
|
The Commission struck out the communication due to the complainant’s failure to prosecute the case diligently.
Human rights – African Charter – complaints procedure – admissibility – failure to prosecute – communication struck out for want of diligence.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
17 October 2018 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
28 April 2018 |
|
Refusal to enforce bail orders, military trial of civilians, and state interference with courts violated the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
Human rights – arbitrary detention – refusal to honor court-ordered bail – trial of civilians by military courts – interference with judicial independence – right to a fair trial – right to legal counsel – assault of lawyers – African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Articles 6, 7, and 26.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
28 April 2018 |
|
The Commission found Uganda violated the rights to liberty, fair trial, and judicial independence by arbitrarily detaining civilians and subjecting them to military courts.
Human rights – right to liberty – right to fair trial – independence of the judiciary – arbitrary detention – trial of civilians before military courts – state compliance with judicial orders – access to legal counsel.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
28 April 2018 |
|
State non-compliance with judicial bail orders and prosecution of civilians before military courts breaches fair trial and liberty rights.
Human rights – right to liberty and security – arbitrary detention – non-compliance with court bail orders – judicial independence – fair trial – military courts’ jurisdiction over civilians – right to legal representation – African Charter Articles 6, 7 and 26 – state obligation to respect judicial decisions.
|
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 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
28 March 2018 |
|
A claim of Ugandan state violence during protests was dismissed for lack of reliable, specific evidence and inadmissible video proof.
East African Community Law – Standing to sue under Article 30(1) – Admissibility of electronic evidence – Right of assembly and protest – Standard of proof in human rights claims – Obligations of Secretary General under Articles 29 and 71 of EAC Treaty – Justiciability of Treaty provisions on rule of law and human rights.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
28 March 2018 |
|
The court dismissed a claim of human rights violations during Uganda's 'walk to work' protests due to insufficient admissible evidence.
East African Community law – fundamental rights – rule of law – right of assembly and protest – admissibility of electronic evidence – evidentiary requirements for Treaty violation – duties of the Secretary General under Articles 29 and 71 of the Treaty – locus standi for legal entities under Article 30.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
28 March 2018 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
6 March 2018 |
|
A complaint was struck out for failure to submit admissibility arguments within the required period, precluding consideration of allegations.
African Commission procedure – communications – admissibility – failure of complainant to submit required arguments on admissibility within prescribed period – strike-out for lack of diligent prosecution.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
6 March 2018 |
|
The Commission struck out the communication due to the complainants' failure to submit admissibility arguments as required by its rules.
African Charter – communications procedure – admissibility – failure to submit arguments – strike out for lack of diligent prosecution – procedural compliance
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
6 March 2018 |
|
A complaint was struck out for lack of diligent prosecution due to the complainant's failure to submit admissibility arguments.
African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights – Procedure – Communication struck out for lack of diligent prosecution – Failure to submit arguments on admissibility within prescribed time and absence of extension request.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
6 March 2018 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
15 April 2013 |
|
Strict time limits under the EAC Treaty preclude the doctrine of continuing violations from extending limitation periods for References.
Community law – Limitation periods – Article 30(2) of the EAC Treaty – No exception for continuing violations – Court lacks power to waive two-month time limit – Legal certainty.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
15 April 2013 |
|
A reference alleging continuing Treaty violation is time-barred if filed beyond two months from the initial act’s occurrence or awareness.
Regional integration law – Computation of limitation period – Article 30(2) of East African Community Treaty – Whether two-month time limit applies to continuing violations – Interpretation of limitation period and scope for exceptions – Principle of legal certainty in regional integration disputes.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
15 April 2013 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
15 March 2012 |
|
A Reference alleging Treaty breaches was struck out as time-barred under Article 30(2) of the EAC Treaty.
Regional integration law – jurisdiction of the East African Court of Justice – interpretation and application of Treaty – human rights allegations – time limit for instituting References – Article 30(2) of the EAC Treaty – proper procedure for preliminary objections.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
15 March 2012 |
|
A Reference alleging Treaty breaches was struck out as time-barred since it was filed beyond the EACJ's two-month limitation period.
Regional integration law – East African Court of Justice – reference for interpretation of EAC Treaty – jurisdiction limited to breaches of Treaty provisions and not direct enforcement of human rights – limitation period for filing references – strict two-month deadline under Article 30(2) – no implied power to extend period or recognize continuing violation exception – proper procedure for preliminary objections.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
15 March 2012 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
11 November 2007 |
|
A Partner State's disregard of court orders and interference with judicial independence violates the rule of law under the EAC Treaty.
Regional integration law – East African Community Treaty – Rule of law – interpretation of Treaty provisions – re-arrest and detention of persons granted bail – independence of the judiciary – jurisdiction of the EACJ – res judicata – powers and duties of the Secretary General under the Treaty.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
11 November 2007 |
|
State interference with judicial decisions by re-arresting bailed individuals contravenes the rule of law under the EAC Treaty.
Regional integration law – Rule of law – Treaty interpretation – Independence of judiciary – Enforcement of court orders – State action undermining judicial decisions – Duties of regional Secretariat – Investigatory obligations under the Treaty – Costs.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
11 November 2007 |
