Case LawAfrican Union / Regional Courts
Request for Advisory Opinion 002/2012 - PALU & SALC
16 January 1970
Headnotes
Type: Order | Keywords: Administration of Justice, Functioning and Independence of the Judiciary, Regional Judicial Bodies, Right to be Heard before a Competent Court, Right to Fair Trial | Outcome: Ruled Inadmissible | State: SADC Tribunal | Provisions: ACHPR 26 : Duty to Guarantee Independence of Courts, ACHPR 3: Right to Equality before the Law and Equal Protection of the Law, ACHPR 7: Right to Fair Trial
Judgment
AFRICAN UNION UNION AFRICAINE
UNIAO AFRICANA
~J~' .lb• .; ·~'
AFRICAN COURT ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES' RIGHTS
COUR AFRICAINE DES DROITS DE L'HOMME ET DES PEUPLES
REQUEST FOR ADVISORY OPINION
No. 002/2012
BY PAN AFRICAN LAWYERS' UNION AND SOUTHERN
AFRICAN LITIGATION CENTER
ORDER
The Court composed of: Sophia A.B. AKUFFO, President; Fatsah
OUGUERGOUZ, Vice-president; Gerard NIYUNGEKO; Bernard M.
NGOEPE, Augustine S.L. RAMADHANI, Duncan TAMBALA, Elsie N
THOMPSON, Sylvain ORE, El Hadj1 GUISSE, Ben KIOKO, and
Kimelabalou ABA- Judges; and Robert ENO- Registrar,
In the Matter of a
REQUEST FOR ADVISORY OPINION
PAN AFRICAN LAWYERS' UNION AND SOUTHERN AFRICAN LITIGATION
CENTER
After deliberations,
makes the following Order
1 By letter dated 23 November, 2012 and rece1ved at the Regrstry of the Court on
the same day, the Pan African Lawyers' Union and the Southern African
Litrgatron Center (hereinafter referred to as 'the Authors'), requested the Court for
an advisory opin1on
2 In their request, the Authors requested the Court to give 1ts opinion on. "(a)
whether the dec1s1on of the Southern African Development Community (SADC)
Summit of Heads of State to suspend the Tribunal and termmate the term of
off1ce of duly elected Judges is consistent with the African Charter on Human and
Peoples' Rights (the Charter), the Protocol on the relat1ons between the AU and
RECs, the Treaty Establishing the African Economic Community, the SADC
Treaty the SADC Protocol and general principles on the rule of law; (b) whether
the decision violates rnst1tut1onal independence of the SADC Tnbunal and the
personal independence of its Judges as provided for under Article 26 of the
Afncan Charter, the UN Pnnc1ples on the Independence of the Jud1c1ary and
2
Value 1 of the Bangalore Pnncrples of Judicial Conduct 2002; (c) whether the
decision violates the rrght to access to justice and effectrve remedies for SADC
c1trzens as guaranteed under Articles 3 and 7 of the African Charter, Articles 18
and 19 of the Tribunal Protocol and UN Basrc Princrples and Guidelines on the
Rrght to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Vrolatrons of lnternatronal
Human Rights Law and Senous Vrolatrons of International Humanrtanan Law;
and (d) whether the decision-making process undertaken in the review of the
SADC Tnbunal junsdrctron are in compliance wrth Article 23 of the SADC Treaty"
3. By letter dated 23 November 2012, the Regrstry acknowledged receipt of the
request
4 By email sent on 5 December, 2012, the Registry inqurred from the Afncan
Commrssion on Human and Peoples' Rights (herernafter referred to as the
Commissron) whether the subject matter of the Request was related to any
matter pendrng before the Commrss1on
5. By letter dated 5 December, 2012. the Commissron confrrmed that there was a
matter pending before it "dealing with the suspension of the SADC Tribunal"
6. By letter dated 10 January, 2013, the Registry transmitted the letter of the
Commrssion to the Authors and drew their atlentron to Rule 68(3) of the Rules of
Court whrch provrdes that 'the subject matter of the request for advrsory oprnron
shall not relate to an application pendrng before the Commrssion'.
7 As at the date of thrs Order the Authors have not responded or otherwrse reacted
to the Registry's letter of 10 January, 2013, transmrtting the letter of the
Commrssron to them
3
8 Now Therefore
(i) The Court finds that the request by the Pan African Lawyers' Union and
the Southern African L1tigat1on Center relates to a matter pend1ng before
the Comm1sston
(11) The Court also notes that the sa1d Authors have not responded to the
Court's letter transmitting the letter of the Commission on the matter
(11i) The Court notes that under Article 4( 1) of the Protocol and Rule 68(3) of
the Rules of Court. the subject matter of a request for advisory opm1on
shall not relate to a matter be1ng examined by the Commiss1on
THE COURT, unanimously:-
Orders that the Request for Advtsory Opinion. made by the Authors, be and the same 1s
hereby declined as it relates to a matter pending before the African Commission on
Human and Peoples' R1ghts
Done at Arusha, this fifteenth day of March in the year Two Thousand and
Thirteen, 1n English and French. the En authoritative
Signed:
Registrar ~
Robert ENO,
4
Similar Cases
18/16 Cosma Faustin v Tanzania
79% similar
006/2012 - African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights v the Republic of Kenya - Judgment
African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights76% similar
004/2015 – Andrew Ambrose Cheusi v. Tanzania
71% similar