Prayers of the Complainants
11. The Complainants request the Commission to set aside its earlier decision, and find the Communication
admissible.
Procedure
12. The request for review was received at the Secretariat on 18 February 2013. The Secretariat
acknowledged receipt and transmitted the request to the Respondent State for its comments on 01 March
2013. The Respondent State has not submitted any comments on the request for review. The Commission
will proceed to examine the application on the basis of the Complainants submissions.
Analysis of the Commission on the Review
13. The present request for review is submitted pursuant to Rule 107(4) of the Rules of Procedure of the
Commission. The Rule provides as follows: If the Commission has declared a Communication inadmissible,
this decision may be reviewed at a later date, upon submission of new evidence in a written request to the
Commission by the author.
14. In order to determine whether the Commission's decision in the above Communication is reviewable,
the Commission will assess whether the issues raised by the Complainants constitute new evidence in
terms of Rule 107(4) of the Commission's Rules of Procedure.
15. The Commission notes that in applications of this nature "the application would be granted where it is
proved that some facts have been discovered which intrinsically might have had a decisive influence on the
judgment had it been brought to the attention of the Commission at the time the decision was made, but
which at the time was unknown to both the Commission and the party making the application and also
which could not, with reasonable diligence, have been discovered by the party before the judgment was
made or on account of some mistake, fraud or error on the face of the record or because an injustice has
been done."2
16. The Commission notes that the new evidence provided in the request for review submitted by the
Complainants is the recent decision of the Court of Appeal, in the Kgosikgolo case.
17. The Commission's jurisprudence highlighted above contemplates a review on the basis of evidence
which existed at the time the Commission took its decision on Admissibility, but was not known to the
Complainants at the time. However from the facts of the review adduced by the Complainants, the
evidence being relied on did not exist at the time the Commission declared the communication inadmissible
in 2011, and therefore does not constitute new evidence within the meaning adopted by the Commission.
18. From the above, it is evident that the Complainants have not adduced new evidence to warrant a
review of the Commission's decision.
Decision of the Commission
19.The application is hereby dismissed.
Done at the 14th Extra-Ordinary Session of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights,
held from 20-24 July 2013, in Nairobi, Kenya
1 Communication 147/95-149/96 - Sir Dawda K. Jawara v.The Gambia (2000), para 31, 32.
2 384/09 - Kevin Ngwang Gumne et al v. Cameroon (2012), para 37
2