Download

Uganda Judgment

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Collectif Des Anciens Travailleurs – BCM Loulo v Republic of Mali (Application No. 005/2019) [2023] AfCHPR 18 (23 August 2023)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The Court determined that the renaming of the title of the application to 'Issiaka KEÏTA and Others v. Republic of Mali' is justified, as the facts and alleged rights violations pertain to private individuals. The change is purely formal and does not affect the substance of the application as notified to the respondent state. The Court exercised its inherent procedural powers under Rule 90 to ensure the ends of justice are met, noting that both the applicant and respondent recognize the applicants as private persons. Accordingly, the Court ordered the amendment of the title and reserved its decision on the merits and reparations.

Court disposition

order_amending_title

Orders

  • The title of the Main Application is amended to 'Issiaka KEÏTA and Others v. Republic of Mali'.
  • The Court reserves its decision on the merits and reparations.

02

Material facts

Parties

Issiaka KEÏTA and Others

Applicant Counsel: Yacouba TRAORÉ

Republic of Mali

Respondent Counsel: Issaka KEÏTA

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Miscellaneous Application / Order Amending Title

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The applicant indicated that it was not a non-governmental organisation with observer status before the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and requested that its identity be restated to reflect the actual individuals represented.
Respondent
The respondent state referred to the applicants as private persons in its submissions, implicitly supporting the renaming to accurately reflect the parties involved.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Rule 90 of the Rules of Court

    The inherent power of the Court to adopt procedures or decisions necessary to meet the ends of justice.

  2. 02

    Court's interpretation of procedural rules

    Renaming of parties is a matter of form and does not affect the substance of the application.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The Court determined that the renaming of the title of the application to 'Issiaka KEÏTA and Others v. Republic of Mali' is justified, as the facts and alleged rights violations pertain to private individuals. The change is purely formal and does not affect the substance of the application as notified to the respondent state. The Court exercised its inherent procedural powers under Rule 90 to ensure the ends of justice are met, noting that both the applicant and respondent recognize the applicants as private persons. Accordingly, the Court ordered the amendment of the title and reserved its decision on the merits and reparations.

Obiter and limits

  • The renaming of the application is a procedural formality and does not prejudice the parties.
  • The French text of the order is authoritative.

Court disposition

order_amending_title

  • The title of the Main Application is amended to 'Issiaka KEÏTA and Others v. Republic of Mali'.
  • The Court reserves its decision on the merits and reparations.

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.

Source document

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Judgment

[2023] AfCHPR 18

| | | | | --- | --- | --- | | AFRICAN UNION | ![Description: Description: Description: Description: AU Court logo](data:image/jpeg;base64...) | UNION AFRICAINE | | ![](data:image/png;base64...) | UNIÃO AFRICANA | | AFRICAN COURT ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES’ RIGHTS COUR AFRICAINE DES DROITS DE L’HOMME ET DES PEUPLES | | |

IN THE MATTER OF

COLLECTIF DES ANCIENS TRAVAILLEURS – BCM Loulo

V.

REPUBLIC OF MALI

APPLICATION NO. 005/2019

ORDER

(AMENDMENT OF TITLE OF APPLICATION)

23 AUGUST 2023

The Court composed of: Imani D. ABOUD, President; Ben KIOKO, Rafaâ BEN ACHOUR, Suzanne MENGUE, Tujilane R. CHIZUMILA, Chafika BENSAOULA, Blaise TCHICKAYA, Stella I. ANUKAM, Dumisa B. NTSEBEZA, Dennis D. ADJEI - Judges; and Robert ENO, Registrar.

In 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[[1]](#footnote-1) (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules”), Judge Modibo SACKO, Vice President of the Court and a national of Mali, did not hear the application.

*In the Matter of:*

Collectif des anciens travailleurs - Bayswater Consulting Mining (BCM) Loulo,

Represented by Yacouba TRAORÉ;

Versus

THE REPUBLIC OF MALI

Represented by Issaka KEÏTA, Advocate at the Bar of Mali;

Pursuant to Article 33 of the Protocol;

Pursuant to Rule 90 of the Rules;

*After deliberation;*

*Issues the following Ruling:*

Considering that, in accordance with Rule 90 of the Rules, no provision of the said Rules shall limit or otherwise affect the inherent power of the Court to adopt such procedures or decisions as may be necessary to meet the ends of Justice;

Considering that, in the present case, on 21 February 2019, Collectif des anciens travailleurs de Bayswater Consulting Mining (BCM) Loulo filed an Application with the Court against the Republic of Mali, seeking to hold it liable and for reparations for the violation of several rights, namely, the right to non-discrimination, the right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law, and the right to have one’s cause heard and, accordingly, to order several reparations;

Considering that, in response to correspondence received from the Registry on 21 May 2020, the Applicant indicated that it was not a non-governmental organisation having observer status before the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and thus requested that its identity be restated as follows: Ibrahima PODIOUGOU, Boubacar D. KONATÉ, Boulkassoum KEREMBE and others.

Considering that the facts cited as well as the rights of which a violation is alleged relate to private individuals, namely, Issiaka KEÏTA and One Hundred and Twenty-Four (124) others, such a renaming is justified by the fact that Issiaka KEITA is the first on the list of one hundred and twenty-five (125) persons who gave the power of attorney to Yacouba TRAORE to represent them before this Court.

Considering moreover that, in its submissions, the Respondent State refers to the Applicants as private persons,

Considering, in view of the above, that the renaming of the title of the Application is purely a matter of form, as it does not affect the substance of the Application notified to the Respondent State.

Therefore, given the above circumstances, the Court orders that the title of the Application should be renamed as follows: *Issiaka KEÏTA and others v. the Republic of Mali*.

For these reasons,

The Court,

*Unanimously,*

*Orders* that the title of the Main Application, henceforth, be as follows: *Issiaka KEÏTA and Others v. Republic of Mali*.

*Reserves* its decision on the merits and reparations of the Application.

Signed by:

Imani D. ABOUD, President;

And Robert ENO, Registrar.

Done at Arusha, this twenty third day of August in the year Two Thousand and twenty-three, in French and English, the French text being authoritative.

1. Formerly Rule 8(2) of the Rules of Court, 2 June 2010. [↑](#footnote-ref-1)

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

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

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Rule 9(2) of the Rules of Court

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Article 33 of the Protocol

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Rule 90 of the Rules of Court

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

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.

About this JurisAssist collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.