[1988] ACHPR 4

[1988] ACHPR 4

The African Commission found that it lacked jurisdiction to consider the communication because Bahrain is not a party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights. The admissibility of communications before the Commission is contingent upon the respondent state being a party to the Charter. Since this...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1988] ACHPR 4
Parties
Applicant: Committee for the Defence of Political Prisoners; Respondent: Bahrain
Court
African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Communication 7 of 1988
Procedural Posture
Communication / Admissibility
Outcome
communication declared inadmissible
Legal Topics
Human Rights Charter, Admissibility of Communications, State Party Requirement
Source Language
en
Public International Law Human Rights Charter Admissibility of Communications State Party Requirement

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Committee for the Defence of Political Prisoners

Applicant

Bahrain

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Communication / Admissibility

  1. 1 Whether the African Commission has jurisdiction to consider a communication against a state not party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.

Ratio Decidendi

The African Commission found that it lacked jurisdiction to consider the communication because Bahrain is not a party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights. The admissibility of communications before the Commission is contingent upon the respondent state being a party to the Charter. Since this prerequisite was not met, the Commission declared the communication inadmissible without considering the merits of the allegations.

Court Disposition

communication declared inadmissible

Orders

  • The communication is declared inadmissible.