Previous 17 / 33 Next

contraceptives and family planning. They add that the Commission also urged States to take appropriate measures to provide comprehensive sex education for girls in schools. The right to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress 84. The Complainants state that women in Nigeria have a right to benefit from scientific progress, including progress in access to quality maternal health services. According to them, the high levels of preventable maternal injuries and deaths in the country, especially in comparison to other countries in the region and around the world, indicate that women receiving maternal care services are not enjoying this right. They point out that by failing to reduce the high rates of preventable maternal injury and death in Nigeria through the provision of quality maternal care services - a reproductive health service that only women need - women are deprived of the opportunity and right to access modern maternity services like their counterparts incountries with similar resources and capacity to those in Nigeria. This constitutes a violation of women's right to enjoy the benefits of scientific progr:ess as envisaged. 85. The Complainants argue that although there is no specific provision on the right to the benefits of scientific progress in the African Charter or the Maputo Protocol, it can be argued that this right is .intertwined with the enjoyment of the right to health guaranteed by Article 16 of the African Charter and Article 14 of the Maputo Protocol. 86. They insist that the Nigerian government should provide an enabling legal and financial environment which will ensure that the benefits of scientific progress perm~at~ th,e health sector and make it accessible to all categories of women without discrimination. Without such measures, Nigeria is likely to maintain its position among the. countries with the highest maternal mortality rates in the world. Violation of the right to ari effective remedy 87. 88. The Complainants argue that the high rates of preventable maternal injury and death in Nigeria have been experienced for more than a decade, with hundreds of thousands of women dying, yet there is still not a single case of judicial or administrative admissibility or remedy available to the victims or their families. For victims to obtain redress, violations must be investigated, perpetrators prosecuted, and reparations - including compensation - provided.

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Communication 564/15 - Community Law Centre, University of the Western Cape & Alliance Africa v. The Federal Republic of Nigeria

ACHPR Decision

Preview

Type of Document

Decision

Keywords

Cruel and Degrading Treatment
Equality
Maputo Protocol
Right to Health
Sexual and Gender Based Violence
Sexual and Reproductive Health Rights
Women's Rights

Case Head Notes: The Complainants state that thousands of Nigerian women have lost their lives because the Respondent State has failed to provide adequate access to maternal health care services. They emphasize that these deaths were preventable, and they note that the Respondent State's per capita health expenditure is among the lowest in the world. They also emphasize that, since only women can get pregnant, the failure to provide quality maternal care services is discriminatory, as it is a unique and important element of womens' health. The complainants also note the inter-sectional nature of discrimination in maternal health services, as poor women often have even less access to quality care services. The Commission found no violation of Article 4 as they state that it was not demonstrated that the Respondent State had sufficient resources to prevent maternal deaths, or that it had failed to take steps to improve the right to maternal health. The Commission found no violation of Article 16 because they state that the highest attainable standard of health is dependent on the economic capacity of the state. They further state that the 15% budget allocation for the health sector, which the Respondent State agreed to in the Abuja Declaration, is an expression of political will, not a legally binding instrument, and cannot be enforced against the Respondent State. The Commission found no violation of Article 14 of the Maputo Protocol because they stated that a causal link between the facts and the alleged violations was not demonstrated. The Commission found no violation of Article 5 because they stated that it was not proven that the omissions of the health service providers had a specific and well-defined objective of humiliating the victims or inducing them to act against their will. Further, they state that it was not established that the acts or omissions of health service providers created feelings of fear, anguish, or inferiority in the victims. The Commission found no violation of Article 2 because, while fees for access to maternity services exist, the Commission states that it was not established the fees were introduced with the particular objective of preventing poor women from accessing maternity services. Regarding the discriminatory requirement that women must have their husband donate blood, or, alternatively, pay a fee, the Commission stated that there was no evidence to establish a violation. The Commission found no violation of Article 3 because they state that it was not established how victims received differential protection by the law and courts of the Respondent State. The Commission found no violation of Article 9 because they state that it was not shown how the ignorance of Nigerian women about contraception contributed to the risk of maternal mortality, or that the Respondent State played a passive role in providing information. The Commission found no violation of the right to scientific progress because they state that scientific progress has to be available, and it was not established how scientific progress in the Respondent State is available and sufficient to overcome these challenges, or that, if it is available, that it has been made inaccessible to women. The Commission found no violation of Article 7 because they stated that it was not demonstrated that the victims were prevented from seizing the compentent bodies, or that they were denied such an opportunity.

Country

Nigeria

Outcome: Decided on Merits

Year Decided: May 23, 2023

Rights Alleged to be Violated (ACHPR Provisions)

ACHPR 16: Right to Health
ACHPR 2: Freedom from Discrimination
ACHPR 3: Right to Equality before the Law and Equal Protection of the Law
ACHPR 4: Right to Life and Integrity
ACHPR 5: Cruel Inhuman and Degrading Treatment

Rights Not Violated (ACHPR Provisions)

ACHPR 16: Right to Health
ACHPR 2: Freedom from Discrimination
ACHPR 3: Right to Equality before the Law and Equal Protection of the Law
ACHPR 4: Right to Life and Integrity
ACHPR 5: Cruel Inhuman and Degrading Treatment

Duration of Procedure

Dec 31, 2014 ~ May 23, 2023

Country Geolocation

Latitude: 9.081999

Longitude: 8.675277

Country Geolocation (linked ACHPR Decision): Nigeria

Primary Documents

Community Law Centre, University of the Western Cape & Alliance Africa v. The Federal Republic of Nigeria.pdf
English
ML TOC
Download View

African Human Rights CLA 2.0

Select target paragraph3

Communication 564/15 - Community Law Centre, University of the Western Cape & Alliance Africa v. The Federal Republic of Nigeria

Primary Documents

Notifications