Tanzania Case Law

mornah v republic of benin application no 0282018 2022 afchpr 22 22 september 2022

Court

TANZLII

The Court found that the Respondent States did not individually or collectively violate the right to self-determination of the Sahrawi people under Article 20 of the Charter. The admission of Morocco to the AU was a decision of the AU Assembly, not attributable to individual States. There was no evidence of wrongful acts or omissions by Respondent States amounting to a breach of their obligations under the Charter. The Court held that the Respondent States' support for diplomatic efforts and lack of specific measures did not constitute a violation, and no causal link was established between t…

Source excerpt

• Right to self-determination
• State responsibility
• African charter on human and peoples’ rights
• Obligation erga omnes
• Admissibility
• Jurisdiction

Read case analysis

belghuith v tunisian republic aplication no 0022022 2022 afchpr 67 23 june 2022

Court

TANZLII

The African Court joined a request for provisional measures with the merits because the interim relief sought overlapped with the substantive claims.

• Right to self-determination
• Right to participate in public affairs
• Independence of judiciary
• Separation of powers
• Provisional measures
• Provisional-measures

Read case analysis

belghuith c republique tunisienne requetes n 0022022 2022 afchpr 68 23 juin 2022

Court

TANZLII

The Court found that the provisional measures requested by the applicant are identical to the substantive claims and could prejudge the merits; therefore, it decided to consider the request for provisional measures together with the merits of the case.

Source excerpt

• Right to self-determination
• Right to participate in public affairs
• Judicial independence
• Separation of powers
• Provisional measures

Read case analysis

belgheith v republic tunisia application no 0172021 2022 afchpr 3 24 2022

Court

TANZLII

The requested provisional measures are identical to the merits of the application and would constitute a premature judgment; therefore, the Court will decide both provisional measures and merits together to ensure proper administration of justice.

Source excerpt

• Provisional measures
• Democratic governance
• Judicial protection
• Right to self-determination
• Participation in public affairs

Read case analysis

zayd v republic of tunisia 2022 005 2022 afchpr 50 16 2022

Court

TANZLII

Requested provisional measures (halting elections, annulling acts, compelling medical examination) are not sufficiently linked to alleged rights violations and would prejudge the merits; urgency and irreparable harm not established.

Source excerpt

• Parliament dissolution
• Military trial of civilians
• Freedom of movement
• Fair trial
• Right to health
• Right to equality

Read case analysis

belgeith c republique tunisienne requete no 0172021 2022 afchpr 3 24 mars 2022

Court

TANZLII

The Court found that the provisional measures requested by the applicant are identical to the relief sought on the merits and could prejudge the outcome of the case. Therefore, it decided to consider the request for provisional measures together with the merits of the application.

Source excerpt

• Provisional measures
• Constitutional abrogation
• Democratic governance
• Right to self-determination
• Right to participate in government

Read case analysis

mornah v republic of benin and others requete en intervention n 0022020 2020 afchpr 42 25 septembre 2020

Court

TANZLII

The Republic of Mauritius, as an African Union member State whose decolonization is not complete and given the erga omnes nature of the right to self-determination, has a sufficient legal interest to intervene in the proceedings to present observations on self-determination and decolonization. The Court has prima facie jurisdiction as the application alleges violations of rights protected by the Charter and the respondent States have ratified the Protocol and made the necessary declarations.

Source excerpt

• Right to self-determination
• Decolonization
• Intervention by third states
• Sovereignty
• Territorial integrity

Read case analysis

mgwanga gunme v cameroon communication 266 of 2003 2009 achpr 99 27 may 2009

Court

ACHPR

The African Commission found Cameroon violated several Charter rights of Southern Cameroonians, but rejected secession and urged dialogue and reforms.

• Discrimination
• Right to self-determination
• Right to fair trial
• Right to life
• Right to liberty and security
• Right to assembly

Read case analysis

jawara v gambia communication 147 of 1995 communication 149 of 1996 2000 achpr 17 11 may 2000

Court

ACHPR

The Commission found that the suspension of the Bill of Rights, arbitrary arrests and detentions, ouster of court jurisdiction, banning of political parties, restrictions on freedoms, and disregard for judicial independence constituted violations of the African Charter. The government failed to justify these measures as consistent with its Charter obligations, and local remedies were unavailable due to the ouster of judicial competence and generalised fear. The Commission held the government in violation of Articles 1, 2, 6, 7(1)(d), 7(2), 9(1), 9(2), 10(1), 11, 12(1), 12(2), 13(1), 20(1), an…

Source excerpt

• Suspension of constitutional rights
• Arbitrary detention
• Freedom of expression
• Freedom of association
• Right to fair trial
• Retroactive legislation

Read case analysis

courson v equatorial guinea communication 144 of 1995 1997 achpr 3 11 november 1997

Court

ACHPR

The African Commission found no violation of the Charter in a complaint alleging politically motivated arrest, detention, and unfair trial in Equatorial Guinea.

• Right to fair trial
• Political rights
• Freedom of expression
• Right to association
• Right to participate in government
• Right to self-determination

Read case analysis