Alleged violation of Article 21 of the African Charter 127. In relation to Article 21, the Complainant alleges that the Respondent State has violated the right of the people of Cabinda to freely dispose of their wealth and natural resources because the Respondent State has made grants and concessions on Cabinda's onshore oil resources "without input from the Cabindans". The Complainant contends that the acts the Respondent State in this regard amount to spoliation under Article 21 of the Charter and should attract a right to lawful recovery and to an adequate compensation. Article 21 of the African Charter states as follows: 1. All peoples shall freely dispose of their wealth and natural resources. This right shall be exercised in the exclusive interest of the people. In no case shall a people be deprived of it. 2. In all cases of spoliation, the disposed people shall have the right to the lawful recovery of its property as well as to an adequate compensation. 3. The free disposal of wealth and natural resources shall be exercised without prejudice to the obligation of promoting international economic cooperation based on mutual respect, equitable exchange and the principles of international law. 4. State Parties to the present Charter shall individually and collectively exercise the right to free disposal of their wealth and natural resources with a view to strengthening African Unity and solidarity. 5. State Parties to the present Charter shall undertake to eliminate all forms of foreign exploitation particularly that practiced by all international monopolies so as to enable their peoples to fully benefit from the advantages derived from their national resources. 128. The Respondent State argues that by Articles 94 and 95 of its Constitution, natural resources fall in the category of items classified as property in the public domain which are reserved to serve national rather narrow local interests. The Respondent State submits further the Province of Cabinda already receives special attention for its contribution to oil revenues. Asserting its sovereign authority and legitimacy to explore natural resources in Angolan territory, the Respondent State challenges the authority and legitimacy of the Complainant to speak on behalf of the people of Cabinda with regards to the exploitation of natural resources. 129. The Commission recalls its jurisprudence which traces the origin of Article 21 to the colonial era when human and material resources in Africa were exploited for the benefit of powers from outside the continent.28 However, the Commission has also held that the rights in Article 21 of the Charter are still applicable in post-colonial Africa in favour of groups within states to the extent that it triggers an obligation on the part of the State Parties to protect their citizens from exploitation by external economic powers29 and to ensure that groups and communities, directly or through their representatives, are involved in decisions relating to the disposal of their wealth.30 Nevertheless, the Commission also recognises the right of State Parties to supervise the disposal of wealth in the general interest of the state and its communities.31 130. The Commission notes that in relation to Article 21 of the Charter, the Complaint invokes a right of the people of Cabinda to dispose of their wealth and natural resources as well as to receive compensation for resources already exploited. In this regard, the Commission notes that the term "peoples" in Article 21 of the Charter can mean either the entire peoples of a given state or a "peoples" within the state. The Commission believes that in the first context, Article 21 of the African Charter empowers a State Party to exercise the guaranteed right free from interference from any other African or non-African state. This has to be the explanation for sub-Articles 4 and 5 of Article 21 which speak to State Parties. 131. However, the Commission believes that a "peoples" within an existing state can be beneficiaries of the right in Article 21 to the extent that it imposes a duty on the Respondent State to ensure that resources are effectively managed for the sole and equal benefit of the entire peoples of the state. Accordingly, the African Commission is of the view that one aspect of the right in Article 21 of the African Charter is the duty of the State to involve representatives of its peoples in decisions concerning the management of national wealth and natural resources. 132. The Respondent State has shown that elected representatives of the people of Cabinda are in the Angolan Parliament which exercises oversight supervision of the management of natural resources. As this Commission noted in SERAC v Nigeria,32 the State has the right to exploit natural resources in its territory. However, the Commission believes that Article 21 of the African Charter presupposes that that right is held 14