AFRICAN COURT OF HUMAN AND PEOPLES 'RIGHTS Application 014/2015 Jibub Amir alias Mussa and Saidi Ally alias Mangaya V. United Republic of Tanzania Separate Opinion appended to the Judgment of 28 November 2019 1. | share the opinion of the majority of the Judges regarding Application, jurisdiction of the Court and the Operative Part. admissibility of the 2. However, | do not share the grounds on which the Court examined: - Admissibility of the Application in relation to the objection by the Respondent State on exhaustion of local remedies concerning the Applicants' claims raised for the first time before the Court, namely, the illegality of the sentence inflicted on them; - And the objection in respect of reasonable time. - As regards the grounds for admissibility of the Application in relation to the objection raised by the Respondent State on exhaustion of local remedies concerning the Applicants’ claims raised for the first time before the Court, namely, the illegality of the sentence imposed on them, the said grounds run counter to: ¢ the tenets of the obligation Court 3. to exhaust local remedies before referral to the It is common knowledge that, in many of its judgments, the Court restated the conclusions of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights’ + Application No. 006/2012. Judgment of 05/26/2017 - African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights v. Republic of Kenya, § 93; Application No. 005/2013 - Alex Thomas v. United Republic of Tanzania, Judgment of 20 November 2015; Application No. 001/2015. Judgment of 07/12/2016 - Armand Guéhi v. Republic of Céte d'Ivoire

Select target paragraph3