137.
In response to the Complainant’s prayer for compensation, the Respondent
State indicates that Victims can resort to the Courts to claim compensation for
harm suffered in accordance with the rules of criminal, civil and administrative
liability. The Public Prosecutor’s statement that no grounds exist for a criminal
prosecution because the culprit is unidentified does not constitute an
impediment for the Victim when it comes to filing for a reinvestigation if fresh
evidence emerges or in a civil claim.
THE AFRICAN COMMISSION’S ANALYSIS ON MERITS
138.
In this Communication the Commission is called upon to determine whether
the violent breakup of the sit-in protest, the arrest and detention of the
protestors, the conduct of the State in relation to the deceased persons and the
property of the protestors as well as the failure of the State to investigate the
incidents, violate the rights of the Victims guaranteed under Articles 1, 2, 4, 5,
6, 11, 14, 16 and 18 of the African Charter, as alleged by the Complainants.
139.
The actions of the State which according to the Complainants led to the alleged
violations can be summarized as follows:
The breaking up of the peaceful sit-in protest in the park through the
indiscriminate use of violence resulting in injury, death and loss of
property;
The arrest and detention of all the protestors, as well as the conditions of
detention;
The failure of the State to inform Victims of the death of family members,
and the unduly high cost of having the bodies released; and
The failure of the State to investigate the foregoing incidents.
140.
There are two preliminary issues for determination which would inform the
determination of the alleged violations. The first matter relates to the role of
the UNHCR in the events that took place. The second relates to the composition
of the group of protestors, which consisted of card-carrying refugees, asylum
seekers and undocumented persons.
35