any warrants. Some of them had their property, furniture and buildings
confiscated. This is what happened, for instance, to houses belonging to
Madam Rose Kamuanya and Madam. Masumbuko Mwali, who were both
arrested instead of their husbands after the latter had escaped from prison
on 28 February 2001.
6. The Complainants aver that it was only after a year’s detention, that is 13
March 2002, that the public prosecutor at the military court announced
that 135 persons, both military and civilian, had been charged for plotting
to assassinate the Head of State, for breach of national security and
Republican institutions and for criminal conspiracy.
7. The Complainants allege that on 15 March 2002, the 135 accused persons
were for the first time brought before a military court. After ten 10 months
of trial, the Court delivered its judgment on 7 January 2003 condemning
thirty (30) of the accused to death, sixty (60) to terms of imprisonment
from six (6) months to life imprisonment while forty-five (45) others were
acquitted.
8. The Complainants state that the trial took place in a military court, a
special court established by Presidential Decree on 23 August 1997, the
organizational rules and functioning of which are not consistent with the
relevant provisions of the African Charter in relation to fair trial.
9. For instance, the Complainants point out that:
a. The members of the Military Court were selected by the Executive
branch. Its presiding judge, a military magistrate, was assisted by
four senior officers with no legal background appointed by the
President of the Republic.
b. The court can judge both civilians and military officers in line with
Article 5 of Decree-Law N° 19 establishing the aforementioned
court: « This Court shall be responsible for execution of sentences in
the existing Code of Military Justice, and wherever necessary, the
ordinary penal code. It shall enforce as much as possible, the rules
of procedure set forth by the Code of Military Justice. Its decisions
are neither subject to appeal nor opposition».
c. This provision was invoked by the Court during the trial to justify
all the shortcomings relating to fundamental safeguards of fair trial
2