bunyerere v tanzania application no 0312015 2019 afchpr 51 28 november 2019

bunyerere v tanzania application no 0312015 2019 afchpr 51 28 november 2019

The Applicant failed to substantiate claims of discrimination, unequal treatment, and unfair trial. The domestic courts properly evaluated evidence and applied the doctrine of recent possession. No manifest error or miscarriage of justice was found. The Application met admissibility requirements, but no violation of the Charter was established.

Citation
bunyerere v tanzania application no 0312015 2019 afchpr 51 28 november 2019
Parties
Applicant: Dismas Bunyerere; Respondent State: United Republic of Tanzania
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
28 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Right to Non Discrimination, Equality Before the Law, Equal Protection of the Law, Fair Trial, Exhaustion of Local Remedies, Reasonable Time for Application
Source Language
English
Human Rights Law Criminal Law Right to Non Discrimination Equality Before the Law Equal Protection of the Law Fair Trial Exhaustion of Local Remedies Reasonable Time for Application

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 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dismas Bunyerere

Applicant

United Republic of Tanzania

Respondent State

Procedural Posture

Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Respondent State violated the Applicant’s rights under Articles 2, 3, and 7 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights
  2. 2 Whether the Applicant exhausted local remedies
  3. 3 Whether the Application was filed within a reasonable time

Ratio Decidendi

The Applicant failed to substantiate claims of discrimination, unequal treatment, and unfair trial. The domestic courts properly evaluated evidence and applied the doctrine of recent possession. No manifest error or miscarriage of justice was found. The Application met admissibility requirements, but no violation of the Charter was established.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Court has jurisdiction
  • Application is admissible