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 Tanzania violated the Applicant’s rights to life and dignity by imposing a mandatory death sentence and hanging, but found no fair-trial violation.
It is in the interest of justice to grant the respondent State a 45-day extension to file its response, reopen the written procedure, and postpone the public hearing, with strict adherence to the new deadline; the request for costs will be considered with the merits.
Source excerpt
The Court found that the mandatory imposition of the death penalty under Tanzanian law violates the right to life (Article 4) and the method of execution by hanging violates the right to dignity (Article 5) of the African Charter. The Court rejected the applicant's claims of torture and unfair trial, finding no manifest error in the domestic courts' evaluation of evidence. The Court ordered the respondent State to annul the applicant's death sentence, remove him from death row, amend its laws to abolish the mandatory death penalty and hanging as a method of execution, and awarded moral damage…
Source excerpt
The EACJ dismissed a Reference by nine Ugandan-based Rwandan applicants as time barred, holding that Article 30(2) of the Treaty deprived it of jurisdiction.
Burundi violated Articles 1, 4, 5, 6, 7(1)(a) read with 26, 9(2), and 18(1) of the African Charter by failing to prevent, investigate, and remedy the extrajudicial execution of Jackson Ndikuriyo, torture and intimidation of his family, arbitrary detention, denial of access to justice, lack of judicial independence, restriction of freedom of expression, and failure to protect the family, in a context of impunity and absence of effective remedies.
Source excerpt
The Commission found that Burundi violated Articles 1, 4, 5, 6, 11, 16, and 18(1) of the African Charter by failing to prevent and punish acts of violence, torture, and repression against protestors and their families, denying them effective remedies, and failing to provide adequate medical care and protection to victims and their families. The state is responsible for the acts of its agents and must provide reparations, public apologies, and guarantees of non-repetition.
Source excerpt
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
La Commission conclut que la communication ne respecte pas la prescription faite à l'article 56(6) de la Charte africaine, car les plaignants n'ont pas fourni de raisons légitimes pour justifier la saisine tardive et n'ont pas démontré que le délai de saisine était raisonnable.
Source excerpt
The African Commission struck out a human rights communication against Egypt after the complainant failed to file admissibility submissions within the set deadlines.
The complainants failed to submit evidence and arguments on admissibility within the stipulated deadline and showed no interest in prosecuting the communication, warranting striking out for lack of diligent prosecution.
Source excerpt
Explore more
