[2022] AfCHPR 3

[2022] AfCHPR 3

The Court determined that the applicant's request for provisional measures is substantively identical to the relief sought on the merits, namely the restoration of constitutional order and repeal of the impugned decrees. Granting such measures at this stage would prejudge the merits of the case. In the interest of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] AfCHPR 3
Parties
Applicant: Ibrahim Ben Mohamed Ben Ibrahim Belgheith; Respondent: Republic of Tunisia
Court
African Court on Human and Peoples Rights
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Application No. 017/2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Provisional Measures / Interlocutory Order on Joinder of Provisional Measures and Merits
Outcome
Application for provisional measures and merits to be determined together; no separate provisional relief granted at this stage.
Judges
Aboud P, Anukam J, Bensaoula J, Chizumila J, Kioko J, Mengue J, Mukamulisa J, Ntsebeza J, Sacko J, Tchikaya VP
Legal Topics
Constitutional Suspension, Separation of Powers, Right to Self Determination, Participation in Government, Provisional Measures, Democratic Governance
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Constitutional Suspension Separation of Powers Right to Self Determination Participation in Government Provisional Measures Democratic Governance

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ibrahim Ben Mohamed Ben Ibrahim Belgheith

Applicant

Republic of Tunisia

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Provisional Measures / Interlocutory Order on Joinder of Provisional Measures and Merits

  1. 1 Whether the promulgation of Presidential Decrees abrogating the Constitution and suspending the legislature violates the applicant's and Tunisian people's rights under the African Charter and related instruments.
  2. 2 Whether the Court should grant provisional measures to restore constitutional legitimacy and legislative powers pending determination of the merits.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court determined that the applicant's request for provisional measures is substantively identical to the relief sought on the merits, namely the restoration of constitutional order and repeal of the impugned decrees. Granting such measures at this stage would prejudge the merits of the case. In the interest of proper administration of justice and given the overlap between the provisional and substantive requests, the Court decided to join the consideration of both and expedite the examination of the application. The Court thus declined to rule separately on provisional measures and will address all issues in the final judgment.

Court Disposition

Application for provisional measures and merits to be determined together; no separate provisional relief granted at this stage.

Orders

  • The Court decides to rule on the request for provisional measures and the merits of the case at the same time.