Share
Anudo v United Republic of Tanzania [2020] AfCHPR 33 (8 September 2020)
- Citation
- [2020] AfCHPR 33
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- African Court on Human and Peoples Rights
- Panel
- Anukam J, Ben Achour J, Bensaoula J, Chizumila J, Eno R, Kioko VP, Matusse J, Mengue J, Mukamulisa J, Orè P, Tchikaya J
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- African Court on Human and Peoples Rights
- Panel
- Anukam J, Ben Achour J, Bensaoula J, Chizumila J, Eno R, Kioko VP, Matusse J, Mengue J, Mukamulisa J, Orè P, Tchikaya J
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Court determined that exceptional circumstances existed, including transmission difficulties to the Applicant's new representatives and the Applicant's refugee status in Uganda, which impeded communication and the ability to file a reply. In the interests of justice and procedural fairness, the Court found it appropriate to re-open pleadings to allow the Applicant an opportunity to respond to the Respondent State's submissions on reparations. The Court exercised its discretion under Rule 50(2) of the Rules of Court, emphasizing that procedural rules must not override the fundamental right to a fair hearing, especially where circumstances beyond a party's control have affected their ability to participate fully in the proceedings.
Court disposition
Order granting re-opening of pleadings in reparations application.
Orders
- Pleadings in Application No. 012/2015, Anudo Ochieng Anudo vs. United Republic of Tanzania, are hereby re-opened.
- The Respondent State's Response to the Applicant's submissions on reparations shall be served again on the Applicant.
- The Applicant's Reply, if any, must be filed within thirty (30) days of receipt of the Respondent State's Response.
02
Material facts
Parties
Anudo Ochieng Anudo
Applicant Counsel: Janemary Ruhundwa, Dignity KwanzaUnited Republic of Tanzania
Respondent Counsel: Dr. Clement J. Mashamba, Solicitor General; Ms. Sarah Mwaipopo, Director, Constitutional Affairs and Human Rights, Attorney General's Chambers; Mr. Baraka Luvanda, Ambassador, Head, Legal Unit, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, East Africa, Regional and International Cooperation; Ms. Nkasori Sarakikya, Principal State Attorney, Attorney General's Chambers; Mr. Mark Mulwambo, Senior State Attorney, Attorney General's Chambers; Ms. Aidah Kisumo, Senior State Attorney, Attorney General's Chambers; Ms. Elisha Suka, Foreign Service Officer, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, East Africa, Regional and International Cooperation03
Procedural history
Posture
Reparations Application / Order on Re Opening of Pleadings
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether exceptional circumstances justify re-opening of pleadings after closure.
- 02
Whether the Applicant was deprived of a fair opportunity to reply due to transmission and communication difficulties.
- 03
Whether the interests of justice require the re-opening of pleadings in reparations proceedings.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The Applicant faced difficulties in receiving the Respondent State's submissions on reparations due to transmission issues to new representatives and his refugee status in Uganda, which hindered communication and consultation with counsel for preparing a reply.
- Respondent
- The Respondent State filed its response to the Applicant's submissions on reparations and maintains that pleadings were properly closed after the Applicant failed to reply within the extended time granted by the Court.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Rule 50(2) of the Rules of Court
Additional evidence or pleadings may only be admitted after closure with leave of Court in exceptional circumstances.
- 02
General principles of fair trial under Article 7 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights
The interests of justice may warrant procedural flexibility to ensure fair hearing.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Court determined that exceptional circumstances existed, including transmission difficulties to the Applicant's new representatives and the Applicant's refugee status in Uganda, which impeded communication and the ability to file a reply. In the interests of justice and procedural fairness, the Court found it appropriate to re-open pleadings to allow the Applicant an opportunity to respond to the Respondent State's submissions on reparations. The Court exercised its discretion under Rule 50(2) of the Rules of Court, emphasizing that procedural rules must not override the fundamental right to a fair hearing, especially where circumstances beyond a party's control have affected their ability to participate fully in the proceedings.
Obiter and limits
- Procedural rules are designed to facilitate justice, not to defeat it.
- The Court will consider exceptional circumstances on a case-by-case basis to ensure fairness.
Court disposition
Order granting re-opening of pleadings in reparations application.
- Pleadings in Application No. 012/2015, Anudo Ochieng Anudo vs. United Republic of Tanzania, are hereby re-opened.
- The Respondent State's Response to the Applicant's submissions on reparations shall be served again on the Applicant.
- The Applicant's Reply, if any, must be filed within thirty (30) days of receipt of the Respondent State's Response.
Source and reliance status
African Court on Human and Peoples Rights
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
African Court on Human and Peoples Rights
Judgment
| AFRICAN<br>UNION | I | UNION<br>AFRICAINE | |------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---|--------------------| | | | UNIAO<br>AFRICANA | | AFRICAN<br>PEOPLES'<br>COURT<br>ON HUMAN<br>AND<br>RIGHTS<br>COUR<br>AFRICAINE<br>DE L'HOMME<br>DES<br>DROITS<br>ET DES<br>PEUPLES | | |
THE MATTER OF
ANUDO OCHIENG ANUDO
UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
APPLICATION No.012/2015
(REPARATIONS)
ORDER
(RE-OPENING OF PLEADINGS)
8 SEPTEMBER 2020

The Court composed of: Sylvain ORE, President; Ben KIOKO, Vice-President; Rafaa BEN ACHOUR, Angelo V. MATUSSE, M-Therese MU KAM ULISA, Suzanne MENGUE, Tujilane R. CHIZUMILA, Chafika BENSAOULA, Blaise TCHIKAYA, Stella I. ANUKAM-Judges; and Robert ENO, Registrar.
Pursuant to Article 22 of the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights (hereinafter referred to as "the Protocol") and Rule 9(2) of the Rules of Court (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules"), Judge Imani D. ABOUD, a Tanzanian national, did not hear the Application.
In the matter of
Anudo Ochieng ANUDO
represented by: Ms. Janemary RUHUNDWA, Dignity Kwanza (an NGO)
Versus
UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
Represented by:
- i. Dr. Clement J. MASHAMBA, Solicitor General, Office of the Solicitor General; - ii. Ms. Sarah MWAIPOPO, Director, Constitutional Affairs and Human Rights, Attorney General's Chambers; - iii. Mr. Baraka LUVANDA, Ambassador, Head, Legal Unit, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, East Africa, Regional and International Cooperation;
- iv. Ms. Nkasori SARAKIKYA, Principal State Attorney, Attorney General's Chambers; - v. Mr. Mark MULWAMBO, Senior State Attorney, Attorney General's Chambers; - vi. Ms. Aidah KISUMO, Senior State Attorney, Attorney General's Chambers; and - vii. Ms. Elisha SUKA, Foreign Service Officer, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, East Africa, Regional and International Cooperation.
after deliberation,
*issues the following Order:*
I. SUBJECT OF THE APPLICATION
1. Pursuant to the Judgment of the Court on the merits delivered on 22 March 2018, Mr. Anudo Ochieng Anudo (hereinafter referred to as "the Applicant") filed on <sup>1</sup> June 2018, his written submissions on reparations. In the said judgment, this Court found that the United Republic of Tanzania (hereinafter referred to as "the Respondent State) had violated Article 7 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (hereinafter referred to as "the Charter"), Article 15(2) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Articles 13 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
II. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE MATTER
- 2. In the Application No. 012/2015, the Applicant alleged that the confiscation of his passport, the imposition of an "illegal immigrant" status and his expulsion from the Respondent State deprived him of the rights to nationality, freedom of movement, liberty and security of person as protected under the Tanzanian Constitution and the Universal Declaration on Human Rights. - 3. On 22 March 2018, the Court rendered the judgment whose operative part, at paragraphs (v), (vi) and (vii), read as follows:
... (v) *declares* that the Respondent State arbitrarily deprived the Applicant of his Tanzanian nationality in violation of the article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(vi) *declares* that the Respondent State violated the Applicant's right not to be expelled arbitrarily.
(vii) *declares* that the Respondent State has violated the Articles 7 of the Charter and 14 of the ICCPR relating to the Applicant's right to be heard.
III. SUMMARY OF THE PROCEDURE BEFORE THE COURT
- 5. On 29 March 2018, the Registry of the Court transmitted certified true copies of the Judgment on the merits to the Parties. - 6. The Applicant filed submissions on reparations on <sup>1</sup> June 2018 and this was served on the Respondent State on 19 June 2018. - 7. The Respondent State filed its Response on 5 December 2019 and this was served on the Applicant on 17 December 2019.
- 8. The Applicant did not file a Reply to the Respondent State's Response despite an extension of time to do so, granted by the Court on 7 February 2020. - 9. Pleadings were closed on 15 July 2020 and the parties were duly notified.
IV. ON THE RE-OPENING OF PLEADINGS
- 10. The Court observes that Rule 50(2) of the Rules provides: "No party shall file additional evidence after closure of pleadings except by leave of Court". - 11. The Court notes that this Rule envisages that additional evidence can be admitted only with leave of court and in exceptional circumstances. - 12. The record shows that there were some difficulties in transmitting to the Applicant's new representatives, Dignity Kwanza, the Respondent State's submissions on reparations for them to file the Reply. Furthermore, the record also shows that the Applicant's status as a refugee in Uganda has made idifficult the communication with his Counsel as regards consultations on the Reply to the Respondent State's response on and to provide the necessary information in that regard. - 13. The Court considers that in view of the afore-mentioned exceptional circumstances and in the interest of justice, it is therefore appropriate to re-open pleadings in this matter.
V. OPERATIVE PART
14. For these reasons:
THE COURT
*Unanimously,*
- i. Orders that, in the interests of justice, pleadings in *Application No. 012/2015, Anudo Ochieng Anudo vs. United Republic of Tanzania* be and are hereby reopened. - ii. The Respondent State's Response to the Applicant's submissions on reparations be served again on the Applicant. - iii. The Applicant's Reply, if any, should be filed within thirty (30) days of receipt of the Respondent State's Response.
Signed:
Sylvain ORE, President;
Robert Eh|O, Registrar.

Done at Arusha, this Eighth Day of September in the year Two Thousand and Twenty, in the English and French, the English text being authoritative.
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.