ACHPR
African Commission on
Human and Peoples' Rights
Human Rights our
Collective Responsibility
56. Consequent to the foregoing, the Respondent State prays that
communication should be declared inadfssiible for the following reasons:
the
(a) The communication is not addressed to aState Party to the African Charter;
(b) The Commission was not seized of thl Complaint within a reasonable time;
(c) The Communication does not set oJt prima facie violations of the African
Charter and is manifestly uruoundedJ and
(d) The Complainants have not exhauJted loca 417~m~iiiesbefore seizing the
The
Afri:::::::n's
analysisonadmiSsibilt[""
.
,
~'!~~
,{,~JI1::: ;[ ·:t·~:\ '".,.
.
"h ,.,~,
57. Article 56 of the Afncan Char~~J."ii~setsout\seve, J,'~,
rer ,;,,~~vthat a
Communication .br?ught under. ~ftic~e~~~~fthe Wrica~ ~~~:(ter must ~atisfy in
order to be admissible for co~.~,~~~ratio~1~~y>th~:~bmmlsslO
equirements
apply conjunctively and cum1!fl~£i~~ly.,
-~ailu~~~;to
satisfy any
e or more of the
prescribed requirements.renders 'fij~'~LaoIIlIriU.R,i<:fltion
inadmissible, unless a
Complainant provi~xs":<,suffident ]g,tWieatiorls:,.>;a,s
,~o why any of the
requirements could ~~fl:;'(' et.
,;{)y;t7',
"j;i;~'/
/1
A/':>:'~:"'::"" ;. ==. _;.
V
' "1\~
58. The Complainaafs submitte
, } all th,e req ",:",~mentsunder Article 56 of the
African Charter .have been compiit~,~with, whir~ the Respondent State disputed
that the Complainants have fulfilreq.~',hJ requirements of Article 56(2), (5) and
(6). Upon careful examination of th'
-s and submissions, the Commission
considers that th~'requirements unde» e uncontested Articles 56(1), (3) and (4)
ha~~;,;,p~encomplied-with and 'Y~~.l,
therefore, only analyze the arguments of
both~;~:p2i~Pt~.
based"-()1:t'!h~1;~QDJ~sted
p~ovisions of Article 56 of the African
Chart~~~;~,'
."-.i','"
./.' ","
I~
~~,
'j"
~'"
.
,.
.
"'"
59. Article 56(f):;:e' t e: 'f'i,it;an Charter states that "Communications ... received by
the Comrrl.i{sionshaU;lfeconsidered if tHey... are compatible with the Charter of
the ~rganii~,t.~on of African Unity or w~th the pr~s:nt Charter." In the case of
KeVIn Mgwan
<unmeet al V Cameroon, tlueCommISSIOnheld that:
The condition relating to compatibility
ili~
•
•
•
.ith the African Charter basically requires
I
The Communi~ati~n should be brou~~t agai~st ". Sta~e party ~othe Charter;
The Communication must allege prmUi facie oiolations of rights protecte b ,
the African Charter;
,",\o(\3d S3a .J.~'"
The Communication ~houl~ be bro1lght ~n respect of Violation~Et1 ~~tjbt,'1-:o,<{>\
after [the] State's ratification of th~ African Charter; or Whe,1J;~.,~h£p~Ol'lR"p"ns
!J
(;J
n'o' ~~ 'P\
(:J
I
I
I
'~cren ~
\~
"
/" '<,'
('''11~'
~~~
\\ "If~l,~
J),
Ul
".
&ge
1'1.,0£
" 0:
'(iY,
5;;
Un; .
}>
<
_l'
~. ,
~I><YV13<J'J3S
ss"- ,"
'.,.:,,~ip-/'vnH NO ",,0'411:1"
~
,. -:__~.c~r;::r
i