lsz v zimbabwe communication 321 of 2006 2016 achpr 10 1 february 2016

lsz v zimbabwe communication 321 of 2006 2016 achpr 10 1 february 2016

The Commission found the communication admissible, holding that ouster clauses may render local remedies unavailable, and that NGOs have locus standi under actio popularis. However, the complainants failed to prosecute the merits, providing no submissions despite repeated requests, leading to the matter being struck out for lack of diligent prosecution.

Citation
lsz v zimbabwe communication 321 of 2006 2016 achpr 10 1 february 2016
Parties
Complainant: Law Society of Zimbabwe, Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights, SADC Lawyers Association, East African Law Society, Bar Council of South Africa, Swaziland Law Society, Law Association of Zambia, Law Society of Lesotho, Zanzibar Law Society, Tanganyika Law Society, Tinoziva Bere, Dr. Cephas Lumina; Respondent State: Republic of Zimbabwe
Court
ACHPR
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
1 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Communication Before African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights / Struck Out for Lack of Diligent Prosecution After Admissibility
Outcome
Struck out for lack of diligent prosecution
Legal Topics
Judicial Independence, Ouster Clauses, Exhaustion of Local Remedies, Right to Property, Access to Justice
Source Language
English
Human Rights Law Constitutional Law Judicial Independence Ouster Clauses Exhaustion of Local Remedies Right to Property Access to Justice

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Law Society of Zimbabwe, Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights, SADC Lawyers Association, East African Law Society, Bar Council of South Africa, Swaziland Law Society, Law Association of Zambia, Law Society of Lesotho, Zanzibar Law Society, Tanganyika Law Society, Tinoziva Bere, Dr. Cephas Lumina

Complainant

Republic of Zimbabwe

Respondent State

Procedural Posture

Communication Before African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights / Struck Out for Lack of Diligent Prosecution After Admissibility

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the ouster of court jurisdiction by Constitutional Amendment (No. 17) Act violates the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights
  2. 2 Whether the complainants have locus standi
  3. 3 Whether exhaustion of local remedies is required when jurisdiction is ousted

Ratio Decidendi

The Commission found the communication admissible, holding that ouster clauses may render local remedies unavailable, and that NGOs have locus standi under actio popularis. However, the complainants failed to prosecute the merits, providing no submissions despite repeated requests, leading to the matter being struck out for lack of diligent prosecution.

Court Disposition

Struck out for lack of diligent prosecution

Orders

  • The communication is struck out for lack of diligent prosecution.