cLq\ zetr oil ,ul aPvB Coo3ol - $j\4 5) oDoSo Dissentinq opinion 000$0s ahi=" T"hikaya, Judge African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR) The Matter of Werema Wangoko Werema and Waisiri Wangoko Werema v. United Republic of Tanzania 7 December 2018 1. Having not been able to agree with my colleagues in the decision Werema Wangoko Werema and Waisiri Wangoko Werema v. United Republic of Tanzania, I hereby explain why I hold a different view. My idea is that this case should have been dismissed as inadmissible by the Court sitting in Tunis. The matter has been brought too late before this Court. 2. ln the instant case, the Applicants are serving 30 years prison sentence at Butimba Central Prison in Mwanza, Tanzania, following their conviction for armed robbery. They petitioned the African Court on 2 October 2015. The petition came after the Tanzanian courts (the High Court and the Court of o Appeal) upheld their conviction by Judgments of 9 October 2Q02 and 1 March 20061. The Application was filed before the African Court in 2015, that is, nine years after the last decisions of the domestic courts. This Application should have been rejected by this honourable Court because of the time - too long - elapsing between 2006 and 2015. 3. Procedural incidents seem to have been debated in the case, but this could not convince. The context of the case, indeed, shows that no legally valid element intervened to breach the nine years period preceding the Application before the African Court. The Court should have proffered as reason for rejecting the Applicant's case the general principle of reasonable time2. o 4. lt will therefore be shown that this appeal is manifestly out of time (l). Besides, the imperativeness of reasonable time will be raised as it renders l ACHPR, Matter of Werema lilangoko Weremq qnd W'aisiri ll'angoko v. Tanzania,7ll2l20l8,p.3, $ 6. 2 Fauveau (I. N.), Duration of international trial and the right to a fair trial, Retue qudbicoise de droit international, Hors-s6rie, October 2010, p. 243 1 ,P0r15