African Union press conference on immunity provisions

Last month the African Union met in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea where it adopted the ‘Protocol on Amendments to the Protocol on the Statute of the African Court of Justice and Human Rights.’ (Incidentally, Equatorial Guinea has not signed the Protocol establishing the Court)

This Protocol has since been the subject of much comment and debate, in particular for its inclusion of an amendment to Article 46A bis of the Protocol on the Statute of the Court which imparts immunity against criminal charges for acting heads of state or government and other senior state officials. For more comment on this particular amendment see Paul Bradfield’s piece here, and Mark Kersten’s piece here.

Today Legal Counsel for the African Union Vincent Nmehielle gave a press conference on the amendments. Despite Professor Nmehielle’s best efforts to discuss other sections of the Protocol including the addition of several crimes not found under the Rome Statute (for example piracy and corruption), almost all the questions were about the immunity provision. His comments on immunity for leaders can be found approximately 26 minutes in to the conference, whilst his comments on immunity for ‘others’ starts around 30 minutes 50 seconds.

Also worth noting are Professor Nmehielle’s comments on the timeline for the creation of the new court, including its ambitious proposed  structure of a “general” chamber handling trade issues and conflict between states, a “human rights chamber” handling work similar to the current Court and the “criminal chamber” handling international criminal law trials. These comments can be found around 32 minutes in.

The video of the press conference can be seen here. Please note that the conference does not start until about 6 minutes in to the video so best to skip forward.

http://summits.au.int/en/livestream?q=livestream

The Court’s power to transfer cases to the Commission

This piece focuses on the Court’s power to transfer cases to the Commission including an analysis of the four cases the Court has transferred so far and the future of the Court’s power to transfer.

The power to transfer a case is found in Article 6 (3) of the Protocol which reads “The Court may consider cases or transfer them to the Commission.” Continue reading The Court’s power to transfer cases to the Commission

A watershed case: Mtikila and others v. Tanzania

 January 2016 update: I hope you enjoy this piece. My article on the Mtikila v Tanzania case has now been published in the African Human Rights Law Journal. You can access the article here.  Also be sure to read the follow up post on the Mtikila reparations judgement here. Enjoy the post! OW

A. Introduction

The following is a case summary of the majority opinion in Mtikila and others v. Tanzania. The judgement was rendered on 14 June 2013 and concerns two applicants (collectively “Applicants”): the first, two Tanzanian NGOs, the Tanganyika Law Society and Human Rights Centre(“NGOs”), the second Reverend Christopher R. Mtikila (“Mtikila”) with broadly the same case; that current Tanzanian election laws, prohibiting independent candidates from  running for public office were in breach of various articles of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (“the Charter”), the International Convention of Civil and Political Rights (“ICCPR”), the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (“UDHR”) and the rule of law. Continue reading A watershed case: Mtikila and others v. Tanzania

The importance of ‘observer status’ for NGOs

This is a short piece highlighting the significance of ‘observer status’ for NGOs considering bringing a case before the Court.

This site regularly refers to the important Special Declaration (see Articles 5(3) and 34(6) of the Protocol) which allows individuals and relevant NGOs with observer status to apply directly to the Court. Too often we tend to pass over the ‘with observer status’ caveat for NGOs. This caveat however is crucial for NGOs considering bringing a case before the Court. ‘Observer status’ is a separate standing granted by the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and must be applied for in addition to any in-country registration. We have seen in the recent case of Mtikila and others v. Tanzania (as well as others) that when NGOs make applications before the Court, the first thing the Court will do is enquire about the status of the NGO with the Commission. From this we can see that being registered within your own country is not enough, and applications made by NGOs without observer status will fall at the first hurdle.

Continue reading The importance of ‘observer status’ for NGOs

In conversation with Dr. Robert Eno, Registrar of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights

About the interview

An initial interview with Dr. Eno, Registrar of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, was conducted in March 2012 at the seat of the Court in Arusha, Tanzania. A follow up interview, also in Arusha, was conducted in November 2013. I have put both interviews together in the same piece, a * indicating November 2013 questions and answers.

Continue reading In conversation with Dr. Robert Eno, Registrar of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights