Commission's Analysis on Admissibility
41. Article 56 of the African Charter outlines seven (7) conditions which must all be
met for a Communication to be declared admissible. Failure to comply with one
or several of these conditions renders the Communication inadmissible.
42. The Commission notes that when the Complainant was requested to submit on
the admissibility of the Communication, he only made observations with regards
to Article 56(5) of the African Charter, and des�te being given the opportunity to
submit
additional
observations
on
the
admissibility
su
missions
of the
State,
refrained from doing so. The Commission in its jurisprudence has held that in
such cases it will still examine the admissibility of a Communication in respect of
each
condition
based
on
the
information.4
available
Accordingly,
the
Commission undertakes the following analysis on admissibility on the basis of
the
Respondent
State
and
Complainant's
submissions
on
,admissibility
in
addition to information relevant to the admissibility of the case, as provided in
the original Complaint.
43. In
relation
to
the
requirement in Article
provides that Communications should
requests
anonymity,
the
Commission
6(.J.)
of
the
African
Charter,
indicate their authors even
notes
that
the
identity
and
which
if the
the
latter
contact
details of the Complainant is indicated in the Communication, and accordingly
finds that the Communication satisfies Article 56(1) of the African Charter.
44. In accordance wiili Article 56(2) of the African Charter, the Communication must
show a p ima fade cases and must be compatible with the AU Constitutive Act
and the African Charter. The Respondent State submits that the Complainant has
failed
to
comply
Complainant
violated
and
does
thus
with
not
the
requirements
substantiate
materially
fails
how
of
the
to show
Article
Articles
how
human
56(2),
in
referred
that
to
1)
have
the
been
rights violations have
occurred; 2) the contents of the Complaint is limited to mere allegations
· .
e
0
at,,0,,
��,:.
r..,
l$
• Communication 304/05 - FIDH and others v Senegal (2006) ACHPR para 38; Communication 3
j,J; -
Economic
lm
Rights and Accountability Project
(SERAP)
v Nigeria
(2010)
ACHPR
para
43;
and
284/03 - Zimbabwe Lawyers/or Human Rights & Associated Newspapers o
f Zimbabwe v Zimbabwe (
..,
\
�
"'
\
�
i ;,"</
Ji�
. �-,';
� / ;? <:I.. ..,
!!2J ""..
,:.�<-"' $
para 8 1 ; and Communication 299/05 - Anuak Justice Council v Ethiopia (2006) ACHPR para. 44; Comm�(o�
328/06 - Front/or the Liberation o
f the State o/Cabinda v Republic o
f Angola (2013) ACHPR para. 38.
' See Communication 333/06 - Southern Africa Human Rights NGO Network & Others v.
para 5 1 .
8
\
c'.
-=--· -
Tanzania (20 I 0) ACHPR,