Previous 21 / 27 Next

iii~ :-\: ACH PR ~L (ff(Jw ~ African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights Human Right s our Collective Responsibility to allow the 1st Complainant to represent the 2nd Complainant in Case Number 31884/2015; (b) the High Court's dismissal of the 2nd Complainant's application for legal aid; (c) the High Court's joining of the 1st Complainant to the order on costs made against the 2nd Complainant; and (d) the Supreme Court of Appeal's dismissal of the Complainants' application for leave to appeal Case Number 31884/2015 in SCA 354/19, which was again upheld in Constitutional Court case of CCT162/19. 86. Article 2 of the Charter states that: EvenJ individual shall be entitled to the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms recognized and guaranteed in the present Charter without distinction ofany kind such as race, ethnic group, color, sex, language, religion, political or any other opinion, national or social origin, fortune, birth, or other status. Article 3 states that: 1. EvenJ individual shall be equal before the law. 2. EvenJ individual shall be entitled to equal protection of the law. 87. Article 20 All peoples shall be equal: they shall enjoy the same respect and shall have the same rights. Nothing shall justifiJ the domination ofa people by another. 88. Article 2 of the Charter prohibits unfair discrimination49 and guarantees equal enjoyment of the rights and freedoms guaranteed in the Charter without distinction, including the rights to be heard under Article 7 which forms the backbone of this Communication. The Commission in its seminal decisions of Kenneth Good v Republic of Botswana50 (Kenneth Good) and Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights and Interights v Egypt51 (Egyptian Initiative) held that discrimination occurs where like cases receive different treatment which is objectively and unreasonably unjustified . To these ends, in Equality Now and Ethiopian Women Lawyers Association (EWLA) v. Federal Republic of Ethiopia, the Commission reiterated that the burden to prove these elements 49 Communication 734/19- J represented by ISLA and KELIN v The Republic of Namibia, M erits, pa 50 Communication 313/05, para 219 51 Communication 323/06, para 121 & 137 21 I Pa ge The African Commission on Human and P 31 Bijilo Annex Layout, Kamb West Coast R Phone: (220) 230 4361 Fax: (220) Fm~il · ;q11-h;qnif 1lffn~frir.~-• 1ninn nrn

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Communication 747/21: Jacobus Stephanus Van Heerden & Anor V. The Republic of South Africa

ACHPR Decision

Preview

Type of Document

Decision

Keywords

Equality Before the Law
Right to Fair Trial

Case Head Notes: The Complainants alleged that the Respondent State's courts issued adverse rulings against them because they were self-representing litigants. They also state that the Respondent State's courts issued arbitrary, and prejudicial orders, and did not give reasons for their rulings. The Complainants allege that their experience is part of a wider-scale of judicial corruption in which the courts treat self-representing litigants unfairly. The Commission found no violation of Articles 7 and 26 because it is a general, and established, legal standard in the Respondent State that a company cannot conduct a case in court, except by the appearance of counsel on its behalf. Accordingly the complainants did not experience differential treatment and their right to be heard was not infringed. Further, the Commission noted that, while the Supreme Court of Appeal did not provide a full written judgment when they dismissed the complainants application, they did provide reasons for the dismissal and that accordingly Article 7 was not violated. The Commission found no violation of Articles 2 and 3 because there was no discriminatory treatment regarding the complainants right to be heard, or right to have equal access to the courts and equal treatment by the law. The Commission stated that the Complainants were held to the same legal standards and procedures as other litigants and that they were not victims of arbitrary application of the law by judicial officers. The Commission found no violation of Articles 19 and 20 because individuals apperaing before the Commission, in their individual capacities, are not the subject of Peoples' rights. The Commission found no violation of Article 5 becuase the Complainants were not disrespected by the Courts. The Commission found no violation of Article 9 because they stated that the Complainants' allegation actually invoked Article 7, and that had already been dealth with. The Commission found no violation of Article 13 because the Complainants were not discriminated against, and it was not clear what element of the case invoked Article 13 rights.

Country

South Africa

Outcome: Decided on Merits

Year Decided: Nov 6, 2024

Rights Alleged to be Violated (ACHPR Provisions)

ACHPR 7: Right to Fair Trial
ACHPR 9: Right to Receive Information and Free Expression
ACHPR 13: Right to Participate in Government
ACHPR 19: Right of All Peoples to Equality and Rights
ACHPR 2: Freedom from Discrimination
ACHPR 20 : Right to Self-Determination
ACHPR 26 : Duty to Guarantee Independence of Courts
ACHPR 3: Right to Equality before the Law and Equal Protection of the Law
ACHPR 5: Cruel Inhuman and Degrading Treatment

Rights Not Violated (ACHPR Provisions)

ACHPR 7: Right to Fair Trial
ACHPR 9: Right to Receive Information and Free Expression
ACHPR 13: Right to Participate in Government
ACHPR 19: Right of All Peoples to Equality and Rights
ACHPR 2: Freedom from Discrimination
ACHPR 20 : Right to Self-Determination
ACHPR 26 : Duty to Guarantee Independence of Courts
ACHPR 3: Right to Equality before the Law and Equal Protection of the Law
ACHPR 5: Cruel Inhuman and Degrading Treatment

Duration of Procedure

Sep 23, 2019 ~ Nov 6, 2024

Country Geolocation

Latitude: -30.559482

Longitude: 22.937506

Country Geolocation (linked ACHPR Decision): South Africa

Primary Documents

Jacobus Stephanus Van Heerden & Anor v South Africa.pdf
English
ML TOC
Download View

African Human Rights CLA 2.0

Select target paragraph3

Communication 747/21: Jacobus Stephanus Van Heerden & Anor V. The Republic of South Africa

Primary Documents

Notifications