[2000] ACHPR 18

[2000] ACHPR 18

The Commission held that the complainant failed to exhaust available local remedies in the Gambia as required by Article 56(5) of the African Charter. The Commission reasoned that the victim does not need to be physically present in the country to pursue domestic remedies, as such action could be taken through...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2000] ACHPR 18
Parties
Applicant: Legal Defence Centre; Respondent: Gambia
Court
African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Communication 219 of 1998
Procedural Posture
Communication / Admissibility
Outcome
communication declared inadmissible
Legal Topics
Deportation Orders, Exhaustion of Local Remedies, Right to Fair Hearing, Freedom of Expression
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Deportation Orders Exhaustion of Local Remedies Right to Fair Hearing Freedom of Expression

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Legal Defence Centre

Applicant

Gambia

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Communication / Admissibility

  1. 1 Whether the complainant exhausted available local remedies in the Gambia before approaching the African Commission.
  2. 2 Whether the deportation of Mr. Sule Musa violated rights under Articles 7, 9, 12(4), 2, 4, 5 and 15 of the African Charter.
  3. 3 Whether the complainant's inability to pursue remedies in Gambia due to the subsisting deportation order constitutes undue prolongation of local remedies.

Ratio Decidendi

The Commission held that the complainant failed to exhaust available local remedies in the Gambia as required by Article 56(5) of the African Charter. The Commission reasoned that the victim does not need to be physically present in the country to pursue domestic remedies, as such action could be taken through counsel. The complaint was filed by an NGO based in Nigeria, and there was no evidence that any attempt was made to seek redress through Gambian legal or administrative processes. The Commission concluded that the complainant should have first pursued remedies in the Gambia before approaching the Commission, and therefore declared the communication inadmissible.

Court Disposition

communication declared inadmissible

Orders

  • The communication is declared inadmissible for failure to exhaust local remedies.