00011ij African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights ooalao Fidèle Mulindahobi v. Republic of Rwanda o Application No. 006/2017 fl 4lo? lao rq (ooouo - ôôô to g) Y,r Dissenting opinion to the Judgement of 4 July 2019 1- lshare the opinion of the majority of the Judges regarding the jurisdiction of the Court and the inadmissibility of the Application. 2- On the other hand, I am of the opinion that the manner in which the Court treated "the default" is at variance with: - the provisions of Rule 55 of the Rules of Court; - Article 28(6) of the Protocol; - its jurisprudence and comparative law. 3- lndeed, Rule 55 (1) of the Rules states: "whenever a party does not appear before the court, or fails to defend its case, the court may, on the application of the other party, render a judgment in default after it has satisfied itself that the defaulting party has been duly served with the application and all other documents pertinent to the proceedings". It is clear from the foregoing Paragraph 1 that a decision to render a judgement in default must meet certain criteria absence of one of the parties or; failure to defend its case; rendered on the application of the other party; service of the application on the defaulting party; service of the other documents pertaining to the proceedings 4- the key element in this paragraph is that the default must be pronounced "on the application of the other party". Therefore, making a decision in default can be a mere issue of form no doubt, but not of procedure that requires a substantive discussion regarding the elements of appreciation and a legal basis. However, neither the case file nor the Applicant's application reveals that he prayed the Court to hand down a judgement in default. 1