49. Furthermore, as regards the third ground, in line with its established caselaw, the Court has held that the case-by-case approach applied in the
African Commission’s decision of Majuru v. Zimbabwe16 is the applicable
one, and not the six-month standard.17 Therefore, the Respondent State’s
argument that the filing of an Application before this Court more than six (6)
months after exhaustion of local remedies constitutes unreasonable time,
cannot be sustained.
50. In the instant case, the Court notes that the Applicant exhausted local
remedies on 21 May 2009, when the Court of Appeal sitting at Mwanza
rendered its judgment dismissing his appeal. This should be the date used
to reckon the time it took the Applicant to file the Application. However, it
was only after 29 March 2010 when the Respondent State deposited the
Declaration accepting the Court’s jurisdiction under Article 34(6) of the
Protocol that the Applicant was able to file the Application. Ordinarily, the
period to be considered for the assessment of timeliness in filing the
Application should be six (6) years, two (2) months and nineteen (19) days,
which is the period between 29 March 2010, the date of deposit by the
Respondent State of the Declaration, and 8 June 2016, the date of filing the
Application.
51. The Court notes, however, that the period between 2007 and 2013 was the
Court’s formative years. As the Court has previously held, during the said
period, members of the public, let alone persons in the situation of the
Applicant in the present case, could not be presumed to have been
sufficiently aware of the Court’s existence so as to file their applications
soon after exhaustion of local remedies.18 Consequently, the period to be
assessed for compliance with the requirement for filing the Application
within reasonable time, is that between 2013, when the public would be
16
See, Communication 308/2005 (2008) AHRLR (ACHPR 2008).
Lucien Ikili Rashidi v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits and reparations) (28 March 2019) 3 AfCLR
13, §§ 52-53.
18 Sadick Marwa v. United Republic of Tanzania, ACtHPR, Application No. 005/2016, Judgment of 2
December 2021, § 52.
17
15