[2019] AfCHPR 35

[2019] AfCHPR 35

The Court determined that, in the interests of justice, the proceedings in Application No. 001/2016 should be re-opened to allow the Respondent State's response to the Applicant's submissions on reparations to be considered. The Court found that the delay in filing was sufficiently explained by the Respondent State...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] AfCHPR 35
Parties
Applicant: Chrizostom Benyoma; Respondent: United Republic of Tanzania
Court
African Court on Human and Peoples Rights
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Application No. 001/2016
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Order on Re Opening of Pleadings
Outcome
Order granting re-opening of pleadings and acceptance of Respondent State's late response.
Judges
Anukam J, Ben Achour J, Bensaoula J, Chizumila J, Eno R, Kioko VP, Matusse J, Mengue J, Mukamulisa J, Orè P, Tchikaya J
Legal Topics
Right to Fair Trial, Equal Protection Before Law, Reparations, Criminal Appeal Procedure
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Right to Fair Trial Equal Protection Before Law Reparations Criminal Appeal Procedure

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chrizostom Benyoma

Applicant

United Republic of Tanzania

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Order on Re Opening of Pleadings

  1. 1 Whether the Respondent State violated the Applicant's right to equal protection before the law under Article 3(2) of the Charter.
  2. 2 Whether the Applicant's right to be heard during trial and appeals was infringed.
  3. 3 Whether the Respondent State's late response to reparations submissions should be accepted.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court determined that, in the interests of justice, the proceedings in Application No. 001/2016 should be re-opened to allow the Respondent State's response to the Applicant's submissions on reparations to be considered. The Court found that the delay in filing was sufficiently explained by the Respondent State as resulting from reforms in the State Law Offices. The Respondent State's response is deemed duly filed and will be served on the Applicant, who is granted thirty days to reply. This ensures both parties have a fair opportunity to present arguments on reparations, upholding the principles of fair trial and equality before the law as enshrined in the Charter.

Court Disposition

Order granting re-opening of pleadings and acceptance of Respondent State's late response.

Orders

  • Proceedings in Application No. 001/2016 Chrizostom Benyoma v United Republic of Tanzania are re-opened.
  • The Respondent State’s Response to the Applicant’s submissions on reparations is deemed as duly filed and to be served on the Applicant.