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 Court held Tanzania violated the Applicant’s rights to life and dignity in relation to a mandatory death sentence and hanging, but rejected other claims.
The prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that both accused were found in possession of 509.63 grams of heroin, chain of custody was maintained, expert evidence confirmed the substance, and defence failed to raise reasonable doubt. Mandatory life imprisonment applies.
Source excerpt
The African Court found Tanzania violated an inmate’s rights to life and dignity by imposing a mandatory death sentence and hanging, but not his fair-trial rights.
The African Court held Tanzania violated the Applicant’s rights to life and dignity by imposing a mandatory death sentence and hanging, but found no fair-trial violation.
The African Court found no fair-trial violation, but held that Tanzania’s mandatory death penalty and death by hanging violated rights to life and dignity.
The African Court held that Tanzania’s mandatory death penalty and hanging as a method of execution violated the rights to life and dignity.
The African Court held that Tanzania’s mandatory death penalty violated the rights to life and dignity, but rejected the Applicant’s fair trial claims.
The Court found Tanzania’s mandatory death penalty and hanging method violated rights to life and dignity, but rejected fair-trial, equality, and discrimination claims.
The African Court held that Tanzania’s mandatory death penalty violated the rights to life and dignity, but found no fair-trial breach in the evidence assessment.
The mandatory imposition of the death penalty under Tanzanian law deprived the applicant of judicial discretion and violated the right to life under Article 4 of the African Charter; execution by hanging violates the right to dignity under Article 5; no violation found regarding fair trial, family, or free movement rights as the conviction was based on sufficient evidence and proper procedure.
Source excerpt
Explore more
