114. The Commission assists States parties to implement their obligations under the Charter. Rule 111 of
the Commission's Rules of Procedure (revised) aims at preventing irreparable damage being caused to a
complainant before the Commission. Execution in the face of the invocation of Rule 111 defeats the
purpose of this important rule. The Commission had hoped that the Government of Nigeria would respond
positively to its request for a stay of execution pending the former's determination of the communication
before it.
115. This is a blot on the legal system of Nigeria that will not be easy to erase. To have carried out the
execution in the face of pleas to the contrary by the Commission and world opinion is something that we
pray will never happen again. That it is a violation of the Charter is an understatement.
116. The Nigerian Government itself recognises that human rights are no longer solely a matter of domestic
concern. The African Charter was drafted and acceded to voluntarily by African States wishing to ensure
the respect of human rights on this continent. Once ratified, States Parties to the Charter are legally bound
to its provisions. A state not wishing to abide by the African Charter might have refrained from ratification.
Once legally bound, however, a state must abide by the law in the same way an individual must.
Holding
For the above reasons, the Commission
Decides that there has been a violation of Articles 5 and 16 in relation to Ken Saro-Wiwa's detention in
1993 and his treatment in detention in 1994 and 1995;
Decides that there has been a violation of Article 6 in relation to the detention of all the victims under the
State Security (Detention of Persons) Act of 1984 and State Security (Detention of Persons) Amended
Decree No. 14 (1994). The government therefore has the obligation to annul these Decrees;
Reiterates its decision on communication 87/93 that there has been a violation of Article 7(1)(d) and with
regard to the establishment of the Civil Disturbances Tribunal. In ignoring this decision, Nigeria has
violation Article 1 of the Charter;
Decides that there has been a violation of Article 4 and 7 (1) (a), (b)(c) and (d) in relation to the conduct of
the trial and the execution of the victims;
Holds that there has been a violation of Articles 9(2), 10(1) and 11, 26, 16;
Holds that in ignoring its obligations to institute provisional measures, Nigeria has violated Article 1.
Banjul, 31st October 1998.
9