|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| November 2024 |
|
|
No Charter violation: domestic courts lawfully applied rules on representation, legal aid, costs and leave to appeal.
Admissibility — exhaustion of local remedies; Judicial fairness — right to be heard and impartial tribunal (Article 7); Independence of courts (Article 26); Legal representation rules for juristic persons; Scope of legal aid (civil vs criminal); Joinder to costs orders; Summary dismissal of leave to appeal with brief orders; Burden on complainant to prove discriminatory application of law.
|
6 November 2024 |
| October 2024 |
|
|
Court dismissed the applicants' application for lack of personal jurisdiction because the respondent had not made an Article 34(6) declaration.
• Jurisdiction – personal jurisdiction – Requirement of Article 34(6) Declaration for direct individual applications • Preliminary examination of jurisdiction (Rule 49(1)) • Res judicata/distinctness of new application vis-à-vis Application No. 006/2012 • Interim relief – injunctions not considered where personal jurisdiction absent
|
16 October 2024 |
|
Provisional requests for release and candidacy were dismissed as they amounted to merits or required domestic factual assessment.
Human rights – Provisional measures – requirements of extreme gravity, urgency and irreparable harm – preventive nature; Court’s prima facie jurisdiction; Limitations on provisional measures where requested relief amounts to merits; Requests implicating domestic factual/procedural assessment (candidate eligibility) are for the merits; Alleged non‑compliance with earlier provisional order noted.
|
3 October 2024 |
|
Court provisionally stayed law enabling executive dismissal of judges to protect judicial independence pending merits.
* Provisional measures – requirements: extreme gravity, urgency and prevention of irreparable harm – prima facie jurisdiction.
* Judicial independence – executive power to dismiss judicial officers – separation of powers.
* Stay of implementation of law and presidential decree pending merits to prevent irreparable harm to judges and judicial independence.
|
3 October 2024 |
|
Applicant's electoral provisional measures partly moot; remaining measures dismissed as requiring merits determination.
Provisional measures – prima facie jurisdiction – mootness of a publication request – provisional relief cannot decide merits – candidacy requirements, sponsorship and criminal-record prerequisites – suspension/replacement of electoral authority members.
|
3 October 2024 |
| August 2024 |
|
|
Communication inadmissible for failure to exhaust domestic remedies after rescission of default judgment and pending High Court review.
* Human rights — Admissibility — Article 56 — Exhaustion of local remedies required where default judgment was rescinded and main review remains pending in domestic courts.
* Procedure — Effect of rescission of default judgment — reopens merits and necessitates further domestic proceedings before international recourse.
* Admissibility — Article 56(1)-(4) and (7) satisfied; Article 56(5) and (6) not complied with.
|
2 August 2024 |
| June 2024 |
|
|
The Commission found domestic delays but no proven violations of Charter rights and dismissed the Complainant’s claims.
Admissibility – exhaustion of local remedies and undue prolongation; Administrative justice – judicial delays and bench constitution; Political participation – challenge to parliamentary Speaker election; Fair trial – right to be heard and appellate access; Torture and ill‑treatment – psychological torture allegations; Remedies – no violations found, claims dismissed.
|
3 June 2024 |
| May 2024 |
|
|
|
23 May 2024 |
| March 2024 |
|
|
Applicant tortured and held incommunicado; Commission found violations of Articles 1, 5, 6 and 7 and ordered investigations and reparations.
Admissibility — exhaustion of local remedies; constructive exhaustion where remedies are practically unavailable due to health, fear and financial constraints; human rights violations — torture (Art.5), arbitrary detention (Art.6), denial of counsel and habeas corpus (Art.7); State obligation to investigate and provide reparation (Art.1); remedial measures including investigation, prosecution, compensation and systemic safeguards.
|
8 March 2024 |
|
The Commission found the respondent State failed due diligence in a trafficking and sexual‑violence case and ordered investigation, prosecution and reparations.
• Human trafficking – trafficking for sexual exploitation – state due‑diligence obligations to prevent, investigate and prosecute • Effective investigation standards – promptness, impartiality, forensic inquiry, protection of evidence • Victim treatment – detention, denial of consular access, non‑punishment principle for trafficked persons • Discrimination – gender‑based and multiple discrimination; substantive equality approach vs comparator test • Admissibility – exhaustion of domestic remedies exception where remedies unavailable/ineffective; psychological incapacity justifying filing delay • Remedies – duty to investigate/prosecute, adopt legislative measures, reparations; quantum to be determined by domestic courts
|
8 March 2024 |
|
Blanket exclusion of first‑born daughters from chieftainship violates Charter and Maputo Protocol; law reform ordered.
Human rights — Admissibility — Exhaustion of domestic remedies; Jurisdiction — African Commission’s competence to interpret and apply the Maputo Protocol post‑Court establishment; Gender equality — statutory male primogeniture in chieftainship as unlawful sex discrimination (Articles 2, 3, 13, 17 of African Charter; Articles 2, 8, 9, 17 of Maputo Protocol); Remedies — legislative reform and customary practice change.
|
8 March 2024 |
| May 2023 |
|
|
Allegations of abduction, rendition and ill‑treatment declared inadmissible for failure to exhaust domestic remedies.
Human rights — Admissibility — Article 56(1)–(7) African Charter — Exhaustion of local remedies — Availability and effectiveness of appeals — Undue prolongation — Rendition, detention and ill‑treatment allegations.
|
23 May 2023 |
| November 2022 |
|
|
Arrest, incommunicado detention and trial of political activists violated rights to liberty, fair trial, expression, association and protection from torture.
African Commission — admissibility; incommunicado detention; torture and inhuman or degrading treatment; arbitrary detention under National Security legislation; denial of prompt access to counsel; unfair special anti‑terror courts; restrictions on freedom of expression and association; State duty to investigate, prosecute and provide remedies; legislative reform (NSA, CPA).
|
9 November 2022 |
|
Communication struck out for lack of diligent prosecution after failure to file admissibility submissions or seek extension.
Procedure – Admissibility submissions – Rule 105(1) – Extension of time – Rule 113 – Want of diligent prosecution – Striking out communication.
|
9 November 2022 |
|
The complainants' communication alleging imminent evictions was struck out for want of diligent prosecution.
Procedure – Rule 105(1) – obligation to submit admissibility arguments within two months; Rule 113 – extensions – failure to apply; Diligent prosecution – absence of submissions for nearly three years – strike out for want of diligent prosecution; Overlap with African Court matters noted but non‑decisive.
|
9 November 2022 |
| August 2022 |
|
|
Commission found torture (including rape) by State agents and systemic failure to investigate, ordering reparation and reforms.
• Human rights — Sexual violence and torture in custody — Rape by or attributable to State agents can constitute torture under Article 5. • State obligations — Duty to conduct prompt, independent and effective investigations; to inform victims; to prevent intimidation and ensure access to remedies (Articles 1 and 5). • Admissibility — Constructive exhaustion of domestic remedies where threats and harassment render local remedies ineffective; assessment of reasonable time. • Related rights violated — Equality and non‑discrimination, liberty and security, fair trial/access to remedies, freedoms of expression, association and assembly, freedom of movement and right to health.
|
2 August 2022 |
| May 2022 |
|
|
Death sentences after trials tainted by torture and unfair procedures violated the applicants' rights to life, dignity and fair trial.
• Human rights law — torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment — inadmissibility of evidence obtained by torture — state obligation to investigate.
• Fair trial — special anti‑terrorism courts — denial of counsel, restricted defence witnesses, defective appeals — impact on right to life when death sentence follows unfair trial.
• Admissibility — exhaustion of local remedies — undue delay in domestic Constitutional Court proceedings as ground to waive exhaustion.
• Conflict context — determination of non‑international armed conflict (Darfur) — IHL standards (Common Article 3/Additional Protocol II) as interpretive guidance for treatment of detainees.
|
13 May 2022 |
|
Eviction of an indigenous community from ancestral forest without consultation, resettlement or compensation violated multiple African Charter rights.
Indigenous peoples; admissibility — exhaustion of domestic remedies and undue delay; forced eviction and customary land rights; property, cultural, economic and environmental rights under the African Charter; restitution, compensation and guarantees of non‑repetition; limits of fortress conservation.
|
13 May 2022 |
| March 2022 |
|
|
Communication struck out for want of diligent prosecution after failure to file admissibility submissions.
Procedure – Admissibility – Rule 105(1) and Rule 113 – failure to submit admissibility arguments within prescribed period – lack of diligent prosecution – striking out Communication.
|
9 March 2022 |
|
Communication alleging clemency and death-penalty procedural violations struck out for want of diligent prosecution.
Procedure – Communication declared admissible – Obligation to submit observations within 60 days (Rule 108(1)) – Extension by application under Rule 113 – Failure to prosecute – Strike out for want of diligent prosecution; Death penalty – clemency procedure; Provisional measures issued but do not waive obligation to prosecute merits.
|
9 March 2022 |
|
|
9 March 2022 |
|
Commission grants applicant’s withdrawal of interstate communication and declares the matter closed under Rule 124.
* Human rights procedure – interstate communication – withdrawal of communication at merits stage – admissibility and amicable settlement attempts – application of Rule 124 of the Rules of Procedure (2020).
|
9 March 2022 |
|
A state's electoral disqualification procedure violated Article 7(1) (right to be heard) and Article 13(1) (right to stand for office).
Electoral law – Candidate disqualification – Residency requirement – Right to fair hearing (audi alteram partem) – Equality of arms – Exhaustion of local remedies where special electoral chamber has no appeal – Right to participate in government – Proportionality of restrictions on candidature.
|
9 March 2022 |
|
Communication struck out for want of diligent prosecution due to failure to submit admissibility submissions within prescribed time.
* Human rights procedure – Communication struck out for want of diligent prosecution – Failure to submit admissibility evidence within two months (Rule 105(1)) – No application for extension (Rule 113) – Commission lacks sufficient information to determine admissibility.
|
9 March 2022 |
|
The Commission granted the complainant's request to withdraw the communication and declared it closed.
* Human rights procedure – Withdrawal of communications – Whether a complainant may withdraw a communication before final determination – Commission practice permitting withdrawal and closure of communications.
* Civil procedure – Diligent prosecution – Consideration of striking out for failure to respond to admissibility requests versus allowing withdrawal.
|
9 March 2022 |
| December 2021 |
|
|
|
3 December 2021 |
| October 2021 |
|
|
Prolonged arbitrary detention, torture, and denial of fair trial rights violate multiple articles of the African Charter and require state redress and reform.
Human rights law – prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment – arbitrary detention – fair trial rights and judicial independence – state responsibility for legislative adequacy and effective redress – administrative detention – religious and family life – remedies for victims of prolonged detention and torture – procedural safeguards for detainees.
|
20 October 2021 |
|
Egypt violated multiple African Charter rights by using excessive force to disperse Sudanese refugees' protest, failing to investigate, and denying remedies.
Human rights – refugees and migrants – excessive use of force – right to life – prohibition of torture and ill-treatment – right to property – right to health – dispersal of peaceful protest – state obligation to investigate – remedy and compensation for violations – assembly and police regulation under African Charter.
|
20 October 2021 |
|
Restricting absentee voting to citizens abroad in government service does not violate the African Charter's rights to equality, non-discrimination, or participation in government.
Human rights – right to vote – absentee voting – non-resident citizens – discrimination – proportionality of electoral restriction – African Charter interpretation – legitimate limitation – state's margin of discretion in electoral matters – diaspora enfranchisement
|
20 October 2021 |
|
Application for review of an African Commission merits decision dismissed for lack of standing, proof of settlement, and compelling new facts.
African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights – admissibility – legal standing and representation – amicable settlement – requirements for review of merits decision – consent of victim – burden of proof in settlement implementation – review of Commission decisions under Rule 111.
|
14 October 2021 |
| July 2021 |
|
|
Disciplinary proceedings chaired by an interested Chief Justice violated the applicant's judicial independence and right to a fair and public hearing.
Judicial independence – Fair hearing – Impartiality of tribunal – Disciplinary proceedings against judges – Public hearing rights – Violation of right to fair trial – Removal of judge for judicial acts – State obligations under African Charter.
|
19 July 2021 |
| April 2021 |
|
|
|
26 April 2021 |
|
|
17 April 2021 |
|
Criminal defamation laws imposing imprisonment for criticism of public officials violate the right to freedom of expression under the African Charter.
Freedom of expression – criminal defamation – custodial sentences – necessity and proportionality of restrictions – public officials – Article 9 of the African Charter – right to fair trial – legality and burden of proof – compatibility of national law with international human rights standards.
|
16 April 2021 |
| September 2020 |
|
|
A complaint filed by a dissolved political party was declared inadmissible for lack of locus standi under the African Charter.
African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights – admissibility of complaints – locus standi – requirement of legal personality for complainant – dissolved entities’ standing before the African Commission – exhaustion of local remedies – right to fair trial – right to life – death penalty – whether provisional measures were binding despite admissibility findings.
|
9 September 2020 |
| August 2020 |
|
|
A complaint about a custodial death was found inadmissible for failure to exhaust available domestic remedies in Nigeria.
African Charter – admissibility – exhaustion of local remedies – death in detention – duty to investigate – procedures before the African Commission – failure to demonstrate exhaustion or unavailability of judicial remedies renders communication inadmissible.
|
17 August 2020 |
|
The Commission declared a complaint inadmissible due to unreasonable delay in filing after exhaustion of domestic remedies.
Human rights – Admissibility – exhaustion of domestic remedies – reasonable time to file complaint – right to fair trial – procedural fairness – Article 56 of the African Charter – limitations of international review bodies.
|
17 August 2020 |
|
A communication was struck out for want of diligent prosecution due to complainants' failure to submit admissibility arguments.
Human rights – African Charter – communication procedure – admissibility – want of diligent prosecution – failure by complainant to submit arguments and evidence within prescribed deadlines – communication struck out.
|
17 August 2020 |
|
The African Commission granted the complainants' request to withdraw and closed the communication without considering the merits.
African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights – withdrawal of communication – application for discontinuation of complaint – closure of matter on request of complainants.
|
16 August 2020 |
| November 2018 |
|
|
Sudan was found responsible for serious and massive human rights violations, including arbitrary detention, torture, unfair trials, and religious persecution.
Human rights – arbitrary detention – torture – extra-judicial executions – fair trial rights – independence of judiciary – freedom of religion and non-discrimination – freedom of expression and association – responsibilities under the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.
|
15 November 2018 |
|
The Commission struck out the complaint due to the complainant's failure to pursue the matter or comply with procedure.
Human rights – African Charter – Admissibility of complaints – Striking out for want of diligent prosecution – Procedural compliance under Commission rules.
|
13 November 2018 |
| October 2018 |
|
|
A communication was struck out by the Commission for lack of diligent prosecution after the complainant failed to submit arguments on admissibility.
African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights – Procedure – Diligent prosecution – Failure to submit admissibility arguments and evidence within prescribed period – Communication struck out for lack of diligent prosecution.
|
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. |
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.
|
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. |
18 October 2018 |
|
The Commission struck out a complaint against Egypt for failure by complainants to prosecute by making required submissions.
Human rights law – African Charter – strike out for want of diligent prosecution – failure to submit arguments on admissibility within procedural deadlines – discretion of the African Commission to dismiss non-prosecuted communications.
|
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
18 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
|
17 October 2018 |