Share
Committee for the Defence of Political Prisoners v Bahrain (Communication 7 of 1988) [1988] ACHPR 4 (26 October 1988)
- Citation
- [1988] ACHPR 4
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights
- Posture
- Communication / Admissibility
- Case number
- Communication 7 of 1988
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights
- Posture
- Communication / Admissibility
- Case number
- Communication 7 of 1988
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The African Commission found that it lacked jurisdiction to consider the communication because Bahrain is not a party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights. The admissibility of communications before the Commission is contingent upon the respondent state being a party to the Charter. Since this prerequisite was not met, the Commission declared the communication inadmissible without considering the merits of the allegations.
Court disposition
communication declared inadmissible
Orders
- The communication is declared inadmissible.
02
Material facts
Parties
Committee for the Defence of Political Prisoners
ApplicantBahrain
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Communication / Admissibility
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
Whether the African Commission has jurisdiction to consider a communication against a state not party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant alleged false imprisonment and torture of persons by the respondent state, seeking redress under the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.
- Respondent
- The respondent state did not submit arguments, as it is not a party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Article 101 of the Rules of Procedure of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights
A communication is inadmissible if directed against a state not party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The African Commission found that it lacked jurisdiction to consider the communication because Bahrain is not a party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights. The admissibility of communications before the Commission is contingent upon the respondent state being a party to the Charter. Since this prerequisite was not met, the Commission declared the communication inadmissible without considering the merits of the allegations.
Court disposition
communication declared inadmissible
- The communication is declared inadmissible.
Source and reliance status
African Commission 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 Commission on Human and Peoples Rights
Judgment
AFRICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES' RIGHTS Fourth Ordinary Session 17-26 October 1988
COMMITTEE FOR THE DEFENCE OF POLITICAL PRISONERS v. BAHRAIN
DECISION
- Citation: Comm. For The Def. Of Political Prisoners v. Bahr., Comm. 7/88, 7th ACHPR AAR Annex IX (1993-1994) - Publications: Documents of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, at 339 (Malcolm D. Evans & Rachel Murray eds., 2001)
COMMUNICATION ON ALLEGED FALSE IMPRISONMENT OF PERSONS AND TORTURE, DATED FEBRUARY 26 1988
- [1] "The African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, established under article 30 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights; - [2] Meeting at its fourth ordinary session from 17 to 26 October 1988; - [3] Considering that the communication is directed against a State which is not a party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights; - [4] Declares the communication inadmissible" (Article 101 of the Rules of Procedure).
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.