they also did not attempt to exhaust it. They have also provided no evidence
in support of their arguments.
40. With regard the Applicants’ second argument, namely, the lack of
independence and impartiality on the part of judges, the Court recalls, in line
with its established jurisprudence, that that the impartiality of a judge is
presumed and undisputable evidence is required to refute this presumption.9
Thus, mere allegation of lack of independence and impartiality of a judicial
authority is not sufficient. In the present Application, the Applicants have not
proved lack of independence and impartiality on the part of the judges of the
Respondent State’s Constitutional Court.
41. The Court infers therefrom that the Applicants are making statements of a
general nature, and accordingly reiterates that “general statements are not
enough. More substantiation is required.”10
42. The Court, therefore, finds that the Applicants’ have failed to justify that the
exceptions to rule on exhaustion of local remedies applies to them. They
should, therefore, have exhausted the said remedies before seizing this Court.
The Court thus finds that the Application does not meet the requirement of
exhaustion of local remedies under Rule 50(2)(e) of the Rules.
43. Having found that the Application does not meet the requirement of Rule
50(2)(e) of the Rules, and given the cumulative nature of the admissibility
requirements,11 the Court need not pronounce itself on the other requirements
Alfred Agbesi Woyome v. Republic of Ghana (merits and reparations) (28 June 2019) 3 AfCLR 235, § 128;
XYZ v. Republic of Benin, Judgment (merits and reparations) (27 November 2020) 4 AfCLR 83, § 82
10 Fidèle Mulindahabi v. Republic of Rwanda (jurisdiction and admissibility) (4 July 2019) 3 AfCLR 389, §15;
Kennedy Gihana & Others v. Republic of Rwanda, (merits and reparations) (28 November 2019) 3 AfCLR
655, §120. Alex Thomas v. Republic of Tanzania (merits) (20 November 2015) 1 AfCLR 465, § 140.
11 Mariam Kouma and Ousmane Diabaté v. Republic of Mali (jurisdiction and admissibility) (21 March 2018)
2 AfCLR 237, § 63; Rutabingwa Chrysanthe v. Republic of Rwanda (jurisdiction and admissibility) (11 May
2018) 2 AfCLR 361, § 48; Collective of former ALS workers v. Republic of Mali, (jurisdiction and
admissibility) (Judgment of 28 March 2019) 3 AfCLR 73, § 39.
9
11