Re. BYANSI (ADD)

Re. BYANSI (ADD)

The Court held that standing in constitutional matters must be interpreted broadly, especially in developing countries where citizens need judicial assistance to access constitutional rights. Byansi had a direct interest as a journalist, and the timing of his press card renewal did not negate his standing. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RLR V.3-2022
Parties
Applicant: Byansi Samuel Baker; Respondent: Republic of Rwanda
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
10 October 2021
Case Number
RS/INCONST/SPEC 00003/2021/SC
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Preliminary Determination of Standing
Outcome
Applicant has standing; proceedings to continue.
Legal Topics
Standing in Constitutional Petitions, Freedom of the Press, Access to Court Proceedings, Media Rights
Constitutional Law Media Law Standing in Constitutional Petitions Freedom of the Press Access to Court Proceedings Media Rights

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Byansi Samuel Baker

Applicant

Republic of Rwanda

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Preliminary Determination of Standing

  1. 1 Whether Byansi Samuel Baker has standing to challenge Article 71(5) of Law No. 22/2018 as unconstitutional
  2. 2 Whether Article 71(5) of Law No. 22/2018 violates Article 38 of the Constitution regarding media freedom

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that standing in constitutional matters must be interpreted broadly, especially in developing countries where citizens need judicial assistance to access constitutional rights. Byansi had a direct interest as a journalist, and the timing of his press card renewal did not negate his standing. The petition was accepted for further hearing.

Court Disposition

Applicant has standing; proceedings to continue.

Orders

  • Byansi Samuel Baker is recognized as having standing to challenge Article 71(5) of Law No. 22/2018 as unconstitutional.
  • The substantive hearing will proceed on a date to be notified by the Court Registry.