Atemnkeng v African Union (Application 14 of 2011) [2012] AfCHPR 53 (7 December 2012)

AFRICAN UNION UNION AFRICAINE



UNIAO AFRICANA

AFRICAN COURT ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES' RIGHTS COUR AFRICAINE DES DROITS DE L'HOMME ET DES PEUPLES

IN THE MATTER OF

ATABONG DENIS ATEMNKENG

v.

THE AFRICAN UNION

Application 014/2011

RULING

The Court composed of : Sophia A. B AKUFFO. President , Fatsah OUGUERGOUZ, Vice-President; Bernard M NGOEPE. Gerard NIYUNGEKO, Augustmo S.l. RAMADHANI , Duncan TAMBALA , Elsie N THOMPSON, Sylvain ORE, and El HadJi GUISSE, Judges ; and Robert ENO- Registrar.

In the Matter of

ATABONG Den1s ATEMNKENG represented by Chief Charles TAKU *v* The Afncan Union

represented by the Legal Counsel of the African Union

After deliberations,

renders the following Ruling:

1 The Applicant, Mr Atabong Denis Atemnkeng, c1t1zen of Cameroon and staff of the Afncan Union Commiss1on, (heretnafter referred to as "the Applicant"), by application dated 18 October, 2011 , rece1ved at the Reg1stry of the Court on 1 December, 2012, seized the Court against the African Unton, (here1nafter referred to as "the Respondent"), allegmg that Article 34(6) of the Protocol to the Afncan Charter on Human and Peoples Rights on the Establishment of an Afncan Court on Human and Peoples' Rights, (hereinafter referred to as "the Protocol"), IS contrary to the Afncan Union Constitutive Act and the African Charter on Human and Peoples' R1ghts and as such an obstruct1on to Justice and the rule of law. promotes 1mpunity as It excludes sect1ons of Afncan c1t1zenry

from access to justice, by plac1ng human rights abusers above the law. and as such should be declared null and void.

- 2. Justice Ben K1oko. who prev1ously dealt with the matter as Counsel for the Respondent, recused himself. - 3 By letter dated 5 January, 2012, the Reg1strar acknowledged rece1pt of the application - 4. Pursuant to Rule 35(1) of the Rules of Court, the Reg1strar commun1cated a copy of the application to the Pres1dent and other Members of the Court. - 5 By letter dated 15 February, 2012, and pursuant to Rules 35(4)(a) and 37 of the Rules of Court, the Reg1stry communicated the application to the Respondent, requesting 1t to tndicate the name(s) of its representatives within 30 days and to reply to the application w1th1n 60 days - 6 Pursuant to Rule 35(3) of the Rules of Court and by letter dated 15 February, 2012. addressed to the Cha1rperson of the Afncan Union Comm1ss1on, the Registry Informed the Executive Council of the African Un1on of the submission of the application as well as the States Part1es to the Protocol. - 7. By email dated 1 April, 2012, the Applicant submitted 'a supplement to the orig1nal case file' - 8 By letter dated 27 Apnl 2012, received at the Registry on 20 May, 2012, the Respondent filed 1ts notice of legal representative and its response to the application

- 9. By letter dated 21 May, 2012, the Regtstry communicated the Respondent's response to the original application to the Applicant. - 10. By letter dated 22 May, 2012, the Registry cornmuntcated to the Respondent the 'supplement to the orig1nal case file' submttted by the Applicant - 11 . On 11 June, 2012, the Reg1stry rece1ved the reply of the Applicant to the Respondent's response, and on the same date communicated the reply to the Respondent - 12 By letter dated 25 June, 2012, the Registry Informed the part1es that pleadings were closed and that they could request for leave to present add1t1onal submissions, if necessary. - 13 By email dated 27 June, 2012, the Applicant submitted an application for leave to present additional submiSSIOns. - 14 Without being granted leave by the Court. on 27 June, 2012. the Applicant presented additional subm1ss1ons . of whtch the Reg1strar acknowledged rece1pt on 2 July. 2012 - 15 Rule 50 of the Rules of Court prov1des that "no party may file additional evidence after closure of pleadings except by leave of Court". - 16 In v1ew of the circumstances. the Court notes that the Applicant was not granted leave by the Court to file additional submissions as prov1ded for under Rule 50 of the Rules of Court

- 17 Furthermore, the appl1cat1on for leave does not explam the bas1s for the add1t1onal submissions, and the submissions themselves do not prov1de any new elements - 18 In consequence whereof, the Applicant's application for leave to make additional submissions IS hereby refused , because 1t is unfounded and in violation of Rule 50 of the Rules of Court

Done 1n Port Lou1s , the Republic of Maurit1us, this ytt~ day of December of the year Two Thousand and Twelve, in English and French. the French text being authontatlve.

S1gned

Justice Sophia A. B. AKUFFO, President