[2018] ACHPR 138

[2018] ACHPR 138

The African Commission found that the complainants failed to submit arguments on admissibility within the prescribed period and did not request an extension of time. The Commission had repeatedly notified the complainants of the need to submit these arguments and deferred consideration of the communication pending...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] ACHPR 138
Parties
Applicant: Ahmed Mohammed Aly Subaie; Respondent: Arab Republic of Egypt
Court
African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Communication 612 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Communication / Strike Out Decision
Outcome
struck_out_for_lack_of_diligent_prosecution
Legal Topics
Right to Fair Trial, Enforced Disappearance, Torture and Inhuman Treatment, Discrimination, Access to Justice
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Right to Fair Trial Enforced Disappearance Torture and Inhuman Treatment Discrimination Access to Justice

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ahmed Mohammed Aly Subaie

Applicant

Arab Republic of Egypt

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Communication / Strike Out Decision

  1. 1 Whether the complaint was diligently prosecuted by the complainants as required by the Commission's Rules of Procedure.
  2. 2 Whether the Commission should strike out the communication for lack of submissions on admissibility.
  3. 3 Whether the complainant's allegations of violations of the African Charter warrant further consideration.

Ratio Decidendi

The African Commission found that the complainants failed to submit arguments on admissibility within the prescribed period and did not request an extension of time. The Commission had repeatedly notified the complainants of the need to submit these arguments and deferred consideration of the communication pending receipt. In the absence of any submissions or requests for extension, and following established practice in previous communications, the Commission determined that the complainants did not diligently prosecute the matter. Consequently, the Commission exercised its discretion under its Rules of Procedure to strike out the communication for lack of diligent prosecution, without...

Court Disposition

struck_out_for_lack_of_diligent_prosecution

Orders

  • The communication is struck out for lack of diligent prosecution.