180. Turning to the argument of the Complainants that the Victim was denied
the right to challenge his detention by way of a habeas corpus application
before a judicial authority and the right to have his detention reviewed on a
periodic basis by :a court of law or other appropriate judicial authority,
the Commission in the spirit to guarantee expeditious access to justice for
persons in detention, would like to refer to its Principles and Guidelines on
the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Assistance in Africa, which provides that
"judicial bodies shall at all times hear and act upon petitions for habeas corpus ... or
similar procedures. No circumstances whatever must be invoked as a justification
for denying the right to habeas corpus ... "91
181. The Commission therefore finds that the detention of the Victim for 23
months without being brought promptly before a judicial authority and
have his cause heard and the denial of his right to challenge his detention
by way of a habeas corpus applic;aticin before a judicial authority, is a
violation of article 7(1)(d) of the African Charter. .
182. Regarding the Complainants submission that the Victim was denied
contact with a lawyer, consular assistance and 'h is family, the Commission
refers to the Luanda Guidelines and Principles and Guidelines on Fair Trial
which states that" all persons under arrest shall have the right of access, without
delay, to a lawyer of his or her choice, or if the person cannot afford a lawyer, to a
lawyer or other legal service provider, provided by state or non-state institutions
including the right of all persons arrested to contact and access a family member or
another person of their choice, and if relevant consular authorities or embassy" 92 .
183.Similarly, the UN Basic Huma,n Rights reference Guide on Right to a Fair
Trail and Due Process in the context of Countering Terrorism provides that
all persons have the right to representation by component and independent legal
counsel of their choosing or to self-representation at all stages of the proceedings,
and to the right to adequate time and facilities to prepare his or her case 93 .
184. Turning to its jurisprudence, the Commission recalls its decision in Malawi
African Association and Others v. Mauritania 94 and in Krishna Achuthan (on
behalf of Aleke Banda), Amnesty International (on behalf of Orton and Vera
Chinua), Amnesty International (on behalf of Orton and Vera Chinua) v Malawi