noudehouenou v burkina faso application no 0102021 2023 afchpr 5 30 march 2023

noudehouenou v burkina faso application no 0102021 2023 afchpr 5 30 march 2023

The Court held that since Reckya Madougou had issued an ad litem mandate to the Applicant, her interests were already represented in the main application, and thus she could not be considered a third party eligible to intervene under Rule 61. The application for intervention was therefore inadmissible.

Citation
noudehouenou v burkina faso application no 0102021 2023 afchpr 5 30 march 2023
Parties
Applicant: Houngue Éric Noudehouenou; Respondent State: Republic of Benin; Respondent State: Burkina Faso; Respondent State: Republic of Côte d'Ivoire; Respondent State: Republic of The Gambia; Respondent State: Republic of Ghana; Respondent State: Republic of Malawi; Respondent State: Republic of Mali; Respondent State: Tunisian Republic; Requestor (intervenor): Reckya Madougou
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
30 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Application for Intervention (incidental to Main Human Rights Application) / Order on Admissibility of Intervention
Outcome
Application for Intervention by Reckya Madougou declared inadmissible.
Legal Topics
Intervention, Admissibility, Locus Standi, Representation, African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights
Source Language
English
Human Rights Law International Law Civil Procedure Intervention Admissibility Locus Standi Representation African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights

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 1 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Houngue Éric Noudehouenou

Applicant

Republic of Benin

Respondent State

Burkina Faso

Respondent State

Republic of Côte d'Ivoire

Respondent State

Republic of The Gambia

Respondent State

Republic of Ghana

Respondent State

Republic of Malawi

Respondent State

Republic of Mali

Respondent State

Tunisian Republic

Respondent State

Reckya Madougou

Requestor (intervenor)

Procedural Posture

Application for Intervention (incidental to Main Human Rights Application) / Order on Admissibility of Intervention

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Reckya Madougou may intervene in the main application as a third party under Rule 61 of the Rules of Court
  2. 2 Whether the interests of the Requestor are already represented in the main application

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that since Reckya Madougou had issued an ad litem mandate to the Applicant, her interests were already represented in the main application, and thus she could not be considered a third party eligible to intervene under Rule 61. The application for intervention was therefore inadmissible.

Court Disposition

Application for Intervention by Reckya Madougou declared inadmissible.

Orders

  • Application for Intervention by Reckya Madougou is inadmissible.