|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| February 2025 |
|
|
Court exercised Rule 46(3) and Rule 90 to reopen pleadings and admitted RFK and IHRDA as amici curiae.
* Procedural law – Reopening pleadings – Rule 46(3) – Court’s discretion to reopen pleadings in the interest of justice.
* Procedural law – Inherent powers – Rule 90 – Court may adopt procedures necessary to meet the ends of justice.
* Amicus curiae – Admissibility and relevance of RFK and IHRDA submissions in electoral rights litigation.
* Electoral law – Allegations of systemic electoral malpractices and broader public interest in adjudication.
|
28 February 2025 |
|
The Court lacks jurisdiction to hear claims against the AU/AUC because they are not State Parties to the Protocol.
* Jurisdiction – Limits of the African Court’s jurisdiction – Applications must be filed against State Parties to the Protocol; international organisations not party to the Protocol fall outside jurisdiction.
* Procedural law – Preliminary examination of jurisdiction under Article 3, Article 34(6) of the Protocol and Rule 49(1) of the Rules.
* Precedent – Falana v. African Union applied: international organisations cannot be bound by a treaty to which they are not party.
|
12 February 2025 |
|
Failure to provide free legal aid breached the right to defence; conviction upheld; moral damages and legislative reform ordered.
Human rights – Fair trial – Right to defence and free legal assistance; Court jurisdiction – material, personal, temporal, territorial upheld; Admissibility – exhaustion of local remedies and reasonable time; Evidence review – no manifest error in domestic proceedings; Reparations – moral damages awarded; Legislative reform – Legal Aid Act 2017 to be amended.
|
5 February 2025 |
|
Failure to pursue the available cassation remedy rendered the fair-trial application inadmissible.
Human rights – Admissibility – Exhaustion of local remedies – Cassation as available and effective remedy in Côte d’Ivoire – Lack of counsel/ignorance not excusing non-exhaustion – Jurisdiction confirmed.
|
5 February 2025 |
|
Application declared inadmissible for failure to exhaust available domestic remedies despite Court’s jurisdiction.
Admissibility — Exhaustion of local remedies — Availability of remedies under domestic Code of Criminal Procedure allowing injured party to request investigation or bring civil action — Application premature; Material jurisdiction — Alleged violations fall within the African Charter and relevant international instruments.
|
5 February 2025 |
|
State violated multiple Charter rights of persons with albinism by failing to prevent attacks, investigate, prosecute and adopt protective measures.
Human rights — Persons with albinism — State duty of due diligence to prevent, investigate and prosecute attacks — Non‑discrimination, right to life, prohibition of torture, children’s rights, health and education — NGOs’ standing and exhaustion of local remedies — Reparations and structural measures ordered.
|
5 February 2025 |
|
Mandatory death sentence and hanging violate Articles 4 and 5; Court orders vacatur of mandatory death sentence, new sentencing hearing, and reforms.
Criminal law and human rights – jurisdiction of the African Court over domestic convictions – admissibility: exhaustion of local remedies and reasonable time – mandatory death penalty violates right to life (Article 4) – hanging as method of execution violates inherent dignity (Article 5) – remedies: annulment of mandatory death sentence, new sentencing hearing, repeal of mandatory death penalty and hanging, moral damages.
|
5 February 2025 |
|
Application declared inadmissible for non-exhaustion of local remedies despite Respondent's default; Court retained jurisdiction.
* Default judgment – Rule 63(1) – Conditions for judgment by default satisfied where State duly served but failed to respond.
* Jurisdiction – Court confirmed material, personal, temporal and territorial jurisdiction under Protocol and Charter.
* Admissibility – Exhaustion of local remedies required; first-instance decisions appealable under domestic law.
* Procedural law – In limine litis dismissal does not automatically negate availability of appeal absent proof.
|
5 February 2025 |
|
Court affirms jurisdiction over alleged Charter violations but declares application inadmissible for failure to exhaust local remedies.
Jurisdiction – material jurisdiction over alleged Charter violations even when underlying dispute arises from contract with a state-owned entity; Limits of Court’s role – not an appellate court but may assess conformity of national proceedings with human-rights standards; Admissibility – requirement to exhaust local remedies; unduly prolonged domestic proceedings must be demonstrated with evidence; availability of Constitutional Court remedy; claims unsupported by domestic proceedings are inadmissible.
|
5 February 2025 |