Tanzania Case Law

mwombeki c republique unie de tanzanie requete n 0302018 2024 afchpr 26 13 novembre 2024

Court

TANZLII

The applicant failed to demonstrate any manifest error or violation of his rights in the domestic proceedings; the evidence was corroborated, the courts considered all arguments, and no substantiated proof of inhuman treatment or denial of equal protection was provided. Thus, no violation of Articles 3(2), 5, or 7(1) of the African Charter was established.

Source excerpt

• Right to a fair trial
• Right to equal protection of the law
• Right to dignity
• Exhaustion of domestic remedies
• International jurisdiction
• Compensation for human rights violations

Read case analysis

maige c republique unie de tanzanie requete n 0182017 2023 afchpr 28 5 septembre 2023

Court

TANZLII

The Court found that the respondent State violated the applicant's right to legal assistance under Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter, read with Article 14(3)(d) of the ICCPR, and his right to dignity under Article 5 of the Charter by sentencing him to corporal punishment. The Court found no violation regarding the right to be tried within a reasonable time, non-discrimination, or the right to fair trial in relation to the evaluation of evidence and grounds of appeal. The Court ordered compensation for moral damage and required the respondent to repeal laws permitting corporal punishment.

Source excerpt

• Right to fair trial
• Right to legal assistance
• Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment
• Non-discrimination
• Judicial remedies
• Compensation for human rights violations

Read case analysis

el sharkawi represented by eipr and osji v republic of egypt communication 39611 2021 achpr 521 20 october 2021

Court

ACHPR

The Commission found that the victim was subjected to torture, incommunicado detention, and degrading conditions in violation of Article 5; his detention was arbitrary, unlawful, and not under effective judicial control in violation of Article 6; he was denied fair trial rights, including access to counsel and timely trial, in violation of Article 7 and 26; his rights to freedom of religion, health, and family life were violated under Articles 8, 16, and 18; and the state failed to provide redress or adequate legislative safeguards as required by Article 1. The Commission held that Egypt's le…

Source excerpt

• Torture
• Arbitrary detention
• Fair trial
• Right to health
• Right to family life
• Freedom of religion

Read case analysis

onesmo c republique unie de tanzanie requete n 0472016 2021 afchpr 18 30 septembre 2021

Court

TANZLII

The Court found that the applicant's right to free legal assistance under Article 7(1)(c) of the African Charter, read with Article 14(3)(d) of the ICCPR, was violated because he was indigent, charged with a serious offence, and faced a severe penalty, yet was not provided with free legal aid. The Court found no violation regarding the evaluation of evidence or exclusion from proceedings.

Source excerpt

• Right to fair trial
• Right to legal assistance
• Judicial remedies
• Compensation for human rights violations

Read case analysis

kisase c republique unie de tanzanie requete n 0052016 2021 afchpr 6 2 decembre 2021

Court

TANZLII

The Court found that the respondent State violated the applicant's right to free legal assistance as required under Article 7(1)(c) of the African Charter and Article 14(3)(d) of the ICCPR, given the seriousness of the offense and the applicant's indigence. Other alleged violations, including denial of a fair hearing and equal protection, were not established due to lack of evidence or because the applicant's arguments were duly considered by national courts.

Source excerpt

• Right to fair trial
• Right to legal aid
• Equal protection of the law
• Exhaustion of domestic remedies
• Compensation for human rights violations

Read case analysis

goa alias vedastus v tanzania application no 0252015 2019 afchpr 40 26 september 2019

Court

TANZLII

The African Court found Tanzania violated the applicant's right to free legal aid in a serious rape conviction case, but rejected his other fair-trial and equality claims.

• Right to fair trial
• Right to legal aid
• Non-discrimination
• Equality before the law
• Exhaustion of local remedies
• Compensation for human rights violations

Read case analysis

ivan v united republic of tanzania application 25 of 2016 2019 afchpr 9 28 march 2019

Court

TANZLII

The Court found that the Respondent State violated Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter by failing to provide the Applicant with free legal aid in a serious criminal case where he was indigent and the penalty was severe. The Court found no violation regarding the evaluation of evidence or the failure to summon defence witnesses, as there was no manifest error or miscarriage of justice and no evidence that the Applicant requested the summoning of witnesses.

Source excerpt

• Right to fair trial
• Legal aid
• Exhaustion of local remedies
• Evidence evaluation
• Compensation for human rights violations

Read case analysis

goa alias vedastus c republique unie de tanzanie requete n 0252015 2019 afchpr 40 26 septembre 2019

Court

TANZLII

The Court found that the applicant's right to a fair trial was violated solely due to the lack of free legal assistance in a serious criminal case, as required by Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter and Article 14(3)(d) of the ICCPR. The Court found no violation regarding the assessment of evidence or the applicant's alibi, nor any breach of non-discrimination or equality before the law. The Court awarded compensation for the violation of the right to legal assistance.

Source excerpt

• Right to fair trial
• Right to legal assistance
• Non-discrimination
• Equality before the law
• Compensation for human rights violations

Read case analysis

abubakari c republica unida da tanzania processo n 0072013 2019 afchpr 86 4 julho 2019

Court

TANZLII

The Tribunal found it competent to order reparations, determined that the applicant suffered moral damages due to violations of fair trial rights, but found no sufficient proof for material damages or for compensation to siblings and nephew. Compensation was awarded to the applicant, his wife, and son, with publication of the judgment as satisfaction. Requests for release, guarantees of non-repetition, and further costs were denied.

Source excerpt

• Right to fair trial
• Compensation for human rights violations
• Judicial remedies
• Non-pecuniary reparations
• State responsibility

Read case analysis

ajavon c republique du benin requete n0132017 2019 afchpr 6 28 novembre 2019

Court

TANZLII

The Court found that the respondent State violated the applicant's rights to equal protection, fair trial, presumption of innocence, property, and political participation, and that these violations caused material and moral harm to the applicant and his family. The Court awarded pecuniary and non-pecuniary reparations, ordered the lifting of administrative and financial sanctions, and required legislative amendments to comply with international human rights standards.

Source excerpt

• Right to fair trial
• Presumption of innocence
• Non bis in idem
• Right to property
• Freedom of expression
• Judicial independence

Read case analysis