lyambaka v united republic of tanzania 2020 afchpr 30 25 september 2020

The application was inadmissible because it was not filed within a reasonable time after exhaustion of local remedies, and the applicant failed to justify the delay.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: lyambaka v united republic of tanzania 2020 afchpr 30 25 september 2020
Parties: Applicant: Hamad Mohamed Lyambaka; Respondent State: United Republic of Tanzania
Court: TANZLII
Jurisdiction: Tanzania
Judgment Date: 25 September 2020
Procedural Posture: Application / Ruling on Jurisdiction and Admissibility
Outcome: Application inadmissible
Legal Topics: Right to Fair Trial, Exhaustion of Local Remedies, Reasonable Time for Filing, Jurisdiction of Regional Human Rights Court
Source Language: english

Human Rights Law Criminal Law Right to Fair Trial Exhaustion of Local Remedies Reasonable Time for Filing Jurisdiction of Regional Human Rights Court

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2

Parties

Hamad Mohamed Lyambaka

Applicant

United Republic of Tanzania

Respondent State

Procedural Posture

Application / Ruling on Jurisdiction and Admissibility

Legal Issues

1 Whether the African Court has material jurisdiction over the application
2 Whether the applicant exhausted local remedies
3 Whether the application was filed within a reasonable time

Ratio Decidendi

The application was inadmissible because it was not filed within a reasonable time after exhaustion of local remedies, and the applicant failed to justify the delay.

Court Disposition

Application inadmissible

Orders

Dismissed objection to material jurisdiction
Declared Court has jurisdiction

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.