[2016] AfCHPR 64

[2016] AfCHPR 64

The Court held that the withdrawal by Rwanda of its declaration under Article 34(6) of the Protocol does not have the effect of suspending or terminating proceedings in cases that were filed prior to the withdrawal. The Court reasoned that its jurisdiction over such applications was established at the time of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] AfCHPR 64
Parties
Applicant: Kennedy Gihana and others; Respondent: Republic of Rwanda
Court
African Court on Human and Peoples Rights
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Application 017/2015
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Application / Interlocutory Order
Outcome
Application to continue; interlocutory order issued.
Judges
Ramadhani P
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Court, Withdrawal of Declaration, Access to Court by Individuals
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Jurisdiction of Court Withdrawal of Declaration Access to Court by Individuals

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

Kennedy Gihana and others

Applicant

Republic of Rwanda

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Application / Interlocutory Order

  1. 1 Does the withdrawal by Rwanda of its declaration under Article 34(6) of the Protocol suspend or affect ongoing proceedings before the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights?
  2. 2 Should the Court continue to examine applications filed against Rwanda after the withdrawal of its declaration?

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the withdrawal by Rwanda of its declaration under Article 34(6) of the Protocol does not have the effect of suspending or terminating proceedings in cases that were filed prior to the withdrawal. The Court reasoned that its jurisdiction over such applications was established at the time of filing, and the subsequent withdrawal cannot retroactively affect the rights of applicants or the Court's competence to hear the matter. This position was confirmed in the Court's earlier ruling in Ingabire Victoire Umuhoza v Republic of Rwanda, which established that withdrawal of a declaration does not impact ongoing cases. Accordingly, the Court decided to continue examining the...

Court Disposition

Application to continue; interlocutory order issued.

Orders

  • The Court unanimously decides to continue examining Application No 017/2015 against the Republic of Rwanda.