Christopher Mtkila v. United Republic of Tanzania, the Court itself decided proprio motu
to order the publication of one of its decisions as a measure of satisfaction.°6
99. The Court further notes that measures regarding the publication of its decision, if
couched
in reasonable
terms,
will not
in any
way
amount
to humiliation
for the
Respondent State.
100. Relying on its own jurisprudence afore-mentioned (supra, para. 98), the Court is of
the opinion that as a
measure of satisfaction, the Respondent State should, within six
months from the date of this Judgment, publish: (i) the official summary of this Judgment
drafted by the Registry of the Court in French, once in the official gazette, and once in a
widely read national Daily; (ii) the same
summary
on an official internet website of the
Respondent State, and maintain the publication for one year.
B) “Guarantees of non-repetition”
101. In their Brief on Reparations regarding what they characterize as “guarantees of nonrepetition”, the Applicants prayed the Court to order “the re-opening of investigations so
that the perpetrators
national
courts",
and
of the assassination may
“to order
Burkinabé
be apprehended
authorities
to submit
and brought before
[to the
Court],
all
information concerning the initiatives taken to that effect within six (6) months”.
102.
In its Brief in Response, still basing its argument on humiliation, the Respondent
State indicates that “exacting the immediate resumption of investigations and production
within a time limit of six months, of all information on measures taken to that effect, is
contemptuous to
the provisions of the
specifically Articles 188 and 189°” thereof.
Criminal Procedure
Code
of Burkina Faso”,
It further argues that “it continues to make
3° Judgment of 13 June 2014, paragraphs 45 and 46 (5).
37 These provisions read as follows: Article 188: “the indicted person whose case the investigating
magistrate has ruled should not continue can no longer be pursued on the basis of the same facts
unless new evidence is discovered; Article 189: considered as new charges are: witness
statements, documents and reports, which having not been submitted for consideration by the
investigating Magistrate are however likely to back up the charges which would have been
considered too weak, i.e. to provide facts regarding new developments useful in determining the
truth" (Registry translation).
31
eG
S&S