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 held that Mali did not violate former workers’ rights to fair hearing, equality, non-discrimination, impartial tribunal, or judicial independence.
The Court found that the applicants had access to national courts, exhausted all remedies, and that the duration and conduct of proceedings were justified by the complexity and number of parties. No evidence was provided of discrimination, unequal treatment, or lack of judicial independence or impartiality. The Court concluded that the respondent state did not violate any of the applicants’ rights under the African Charter.
Source excerpt
The African Court held that Tanzania violated Robert Richard’s right to be tried within a reasonable time after his appeal lingered for almost ten years.
The Respondent State violated the Applicant's right to be tried within a reasonable time by failing to process his cassation appeal for over twenty years, constituting negligence and breach of Article 7(1)(d) of the Charter.
Source excerpt
The Court found that the nearly ten-year delay in deciding the applicant’s appeal, without justification or complexity, constituted a violation of the right to be tried within a reasonable time under Article 7(1)(d) of the African Charter. The delay was attributable to the respondent state, and the applicant had exercised due diligence.
Source excerpt
The African Court found Tanzania violated Mallya’s rights to appeal, to be tried within a reasonable time, and to liberty after delaying appeal documents for years.
The Court held Tanzania violated rights to residence, dignity, integrity, and hearing within a reasonable time, and awarded limited reparations.
The Court found that the applicant was in possession of official documents indicating a pending passport replacement and a valid police certificate at the time of arrest, making his detention and subsequent expulsion a violation of his right to choose residence and freedom of movement. The rectal search, conducted without necessity and in front of his children, constituted degrading treatment and violated his dignity and physical integrity. The excessive delay of over six years in the domestic proceedings was unreasonable and violated the right to be tried within a reasonable time. The applic…
Source excerpt
The Court found that the applicant's right to be tried within a reasonable time (Article 7(1)(d) of the Charter) and the right not to be subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 5 of the Charter, specifically regarding deprivation of food) were violated. Other alleged violations, including denial of interpreter, legal counsel, consular assistance, and property rights, were not established. The Court awarded compensation for the established violations but rejected requests for release, annulment of conviction, and other forms of relief.
Source excerpt
The Court found that the applicant's right to be tried within a reasonable time (Article 7(1)(d)) and right not to be subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment (Article 5) were violated by the respondent due to excessive delay in proceedings and deprivation of food during detention. Other alleged violations, including lack of interpreter, legal counsel, consular assistance, improper investigation, violation of presumption of innocence, and arbitrary deprivation of property, were not established. The Court awarded pecuniary compensation for the established violations but rejected requests f…
Source excerpt
Explore more
