spilg and others v botswana communication 277 of 2003 2011 achpr 81 1 december 2011

spilg and others v botswana communication 277 of 2003 2011 achpr 81 1 december 2011

There was no violation of Articles 2, 3, 4, or 7 as the law was applied equally, due process was followed, and the death penalty was imposed for a most serious crime. However, Botswana violated Article 5 by failing to give notice of the date and time of execution to the victim and his family, depriving them of closure and dignity, which constitutes cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.

Citation
spilg and others v botswana communication 277 of 2003 2011 achpr 81 1 december 2011
Parties
Complainant's Advocate: Brain Spilg; Complainant's Advocate: Unoda Mack; Complainant NGO: DITSHWANELO; Complainant/victim: Lehlohonolo Bernard Kobedi; Respondent State: Republic of Botswana
Court
ACHPR
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
1 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Communication / Final Merits Decision
Outcome
Partial finding of violation
Legal Topics
Death Penalty, Right to Life, Right to Fair Trial, Prohibition of Torture, Equality Before the Law, Discrimination, Exhaustion of Local Remedies
Source Language
English
Human Rights Law Criminal Law Death Penalty Right to Life Right to Fair Trial Prohibition of Torture Equality Before the Law Discrimination +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brain Spilg

Complainant's Advocate

Unoda Mack

Complainant's Advocate

DITSHWANELO

Complainant NGO

Lehlohonolo Bernard Kobedi

Complainant/victim

Republic of Botswana

Respondent State

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Communication / Final Merits Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Botswana's mandatory death penalty for murder violates the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights
  2. 2 Whether the application of the doctrine of functus officio and refusal to admit new evidence violated fair trial rights
  3. 3 Whether execution by hanging and lack of notice to family constitute cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment

Ratio Decidendi

There was no violation of Articles 2, 3, 4, or 7 as the law was applied equally, due process was followed, and the death penalty was imposed for a most serious crime. However, Botswana violated Article 5 by failing to give notice of the date and time of execution to the victim and his family, depriving them of closure and dignity, which constitutes cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.

Court Disposition

Partial finding of violation

Orders

  • Botswana violated Article 5 of the African Charter by failing to give notice of execution to the victim and his family.
  • No violation found of Articles 2, 3, 4, and 7(1)(d) of the African Charter.