Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Tanzania decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The African Court reopened pleadings in an electoral-rights case against Tanzania and allowed RFK Human Rights and IHRDA to intervene as amici curiae.
Given the complexity and potential impact of the case, the Court exercises its discretion to reopen proceedings and allow additional submissions, including intervention by amici curiae.
Source excerpt
Given the complexity and potential broader impact of the issues arising from the 2020 Tanzanian elections, and in the interests of justice, the Court exercises its discretion to reopen pleadings and allow additional submissions. The expertise of RFK and IHRDA in electoral disputes is deemed beneficial, justifying their admission as amici curiae.
Source excerpt
The East African Court of Justice adopted its intervention ruling in this application, finding related intervention requests substantively identical and addressing consolidation later.
The African Court held that Harouna Dicko and Others v. Burkina Faso was within its jurisdiction, but declared the application inadmissible for non-exhaustion of local remedies.
The African Court held that one request for provisional measures in Hasna Ben Slimane v Tunisia was moot and dismissed the remaining requests as touching the merits.
The application is inadmissible because the applicants did not exhaust domestic remedies as required; they failed to raise the constitutionality of the law by way of exception before ordinary courts, as mandated by national law, instead seizing the Constitutional Council by direct action after promulgation, which is not an available remedy under the Constitution.
Source excerpt
The African Court held that Malawi did not violate Charter rights when its Supreme Court nullified an election, ordered a fresh vote, and rejected related procedural complaints.
The Court held that the absence of prescribed qualification criteria for the appointment of the Director of Elections and Returning Officers under articles 6(1), 7(2), and 7(3) of the NEA violates Article 13(1) of the African Charter, as it fails to ensure the independence, impartiality, and competence required for such positions. However, restricting eligibility to public servants does not, in itself, violate the Charter. The Court found no violation of Articles 2 or 3 regarding non-discrimination and equality before the law, nor of Article 13(1) in relation to the mere fact of presidential…
Source excerpt
The Court held that the absence of prescribed qualification criteria for the appointment of the Director of Elections and for electoral officials under sections 6(1), 7(2), and 7(3) of the NEA violates Article 13(1) of the African Charter, as it fails to ensure the independence, impartiality, and competence required for such positions. The restriction of eligibility to public servants alone was not found to violate the Charter. The Court found no violation of Articles 2 or 3 of the Charter. The respondent State was ordered to amend the impugned provisions to align with the Charter.
Source excerpt
Explore more
