Previous 5 / 27 Next

'i~'~C~!~\\, 1 ACH PR t\ African Commission on '(rrrru5'1. Human Rights our Collective Responsibility Human and Peoples' Rights ii. In the alternative and addition to paragraph 8.1 supra, that the Constitutional Court set aside the order made under case number CCT162/2.019 and to enroll the matter for a proper hearing with oral arguments by those parties; iii. In the further alternative to paragraphs 8.1 and 8.2 supra, that either the Commission or as a referral to the African Court hears the matter under CCT162/2.019 as an institution, or Court, of Appeal in relation to human rights violations as prohibited by the Charter; iv. That it be declared that the State Partt; violated the human and peoples' rights of the main Complainants, and those represented In; LFN as its members, by utilizing practices in the SCA and Constitutional Court of the State ParhJ to selectively choose cases to proceed with hearings before them and to arbitrarily dismiss cases having constitutional and human rights merits; ADMISSIBILITY THE SUBMISSIONS FROM THE COMPLAINANT ON ADMISSIBILITY 35. The Complainants submit that they have adhered to all the conditions set out in Article 56 of the Charter on Admissibility. They submit that their Communication indicates the authors; is compatible with the Charter; is not written in disparaging or insulting language directed against the State Party and its institutions or to the AU; Is based on actual events experienced by the Complainants and not based on news disseminated through the mass media; has been sent after exhausting local remedies at the Constitutional Court; has been submitted within a reasonable period of only two (2) months from the time the Constitutional Court judgment was delivered and does not deal with any matter which has been settled by t<he State Party.1 36. The Complainants extensively argued that by being dismissed at the Constitutional Court, they exhausted all remedies and that any other alternative remedy suggested would not be effective. 2 THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE RESPONDENT STATE ON ADMISSIBILITY 1 Complainants' Observations on Admissibility & Merits, para 15 2 Complainants' Observations on Admissibility & Merits, para 16-20 SI Page The African Commission on Human and Pe 31 Bijilo Annex Layout. Kombo West Coast R Phone: (220) 230 4361 Fax: (2 l=m;1i l · ~ 11-h~ni1 llfrr)::efrir.~-

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