joana v madagascar communication 108 of 1993 1996 achpr 5 31 october 1996

joana v madagascar communication 108 of 1993 1996 achpr 5 31 october 1996

The Commission declared the communication inadmissible because it was unable to maintain contact with the complainant or their legal successor, as required by Article 56.1 of the Charter and Rule 104 of the Rules of Procedure.

Citation
joana v madagascar communication 108 of 1993 1996 achpr 5 31 october 1996
Parties
Complainant: Monja Joana; Respondent State: Madagascar
Court
ACHPR
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
31 October 1996
Procedural Posture
Communication to African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights / Admissibility Decision
Outcome
Communication declared inadmissible
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Communications, Right to Be Heard, Procedural Requirements, Loss of Contact With Complainant
Source Language
English
Human Rights Law International Law Admissibility of Communications Right to Be Heard Procedural Requirements Loss of Contact With Complainant

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Monja Joana

Complainant

Madagascar

Respondent State

Procedural Posture

Communication to African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights / Admissibility Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the communication is admissible under Article 56.1 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights
  2. 2 Whether the Commission can proceed in the absence of contact with the complainant or their legal successor

Ratio Decidendi

The Commission declared the communication inadmissible because it was unable to maintain contact with the complainant or their legal successor, as required by Article 56.1 of the Charter and Rule 104 of the Rules of Procedure.

Court Disposition

Communication declared inadmissible