kenyatta and another represented by innocence project africa v republic of kenya communication 46414 2014 achpr 5 14 march 2014

kenyatta and another represented by innocence project africa v republic of kenya communication 46414 2014 achpr 5 14 march 2014

The complaint was found inadmissible because it contained disparaging and insulting language, failed to demonstrate exhaustion or unavailability of domestic remedies, did not establish a prima facie violation of the African Charter, and lacked evidence of consent from the victims.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
kenyatta and another represented by innocence project africa v republic of kenya communication 46414 2014 achpr 5 14 march 2014
Parties
Complainant: Uhuru Kenyatta; Complainant: William Ruto; Respondent: Republic of Kenya
Court
ACHPR
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
14 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint / Decision on Seizure
Outcome
not seized
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Complaints, Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies, Disparaging Language in Pleadings, Rights to Fair Trial, State Obligations Under African Charter
Source Language
english
Human Rights Law International Law Admissibility of Complaints Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies Disparaging Language in Pleadings Rights to Fair Trial State Obligations Under African Charter

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 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Uhuru Kenyatta

Complainant

William Ruto

Complainant

Republic of Kenya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint / Decision on Seizure

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the complaint meets admissibility requirements under Article 56 of the African Charter
  2. 2 Whether the complaint contains disparaging or insulting language
  3. 3 Whether domestic remedies were exhausted or shown to be unavailable

Ratio Decidendi

The complaint was found inadmissible because it contained disparaging and insulting language, failed to demonstrate exhaustion or unavailability of domestic remedies, did not establish a prima facie violation of the African Charter, and lacked evidence of consent from the victims.

Court Disposition

not seized