Share
Dumbaya v Gambia (Communication 127 of 1994) [1994] ACHPR 11 (3 November 1994)
- Citation
- [1994] ACHPR 11
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights
- Posture
- Human Rights Communication / Admissibility
- Case number
- Communication 127 of 1994
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights
- Posture
- Human Rights Communication / Admissibility
- Case number
- Communication 127 of 1994
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Commission found that the complainant failed to respond to its requests for information regarding the exhaustion of local remedies. In the absence of evidence that local remedies had been pursued and exhausted, or that such remedies were unavailable or ineffective, the Commission was compelled to declare the communication inadmissible in accordance with Article 56(5) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.
Court disposition
communication declared inadmissible for lack of exhaustion of local remedies
Orders
- The communication is declared inadmissible.
02
Material facts
Parties
Sana Dumbaya
ApplicantThe Gambia
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Human Rights Communication / Admissibility
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the complainant exhausted all available local remedies before approaching the Commission.
- 02
Whether the communication is admissible in light of the complainant's failure to respond to requests for information.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant alleges wrongful dismissal from his position as registry clerk for the Ministry for Local Government and Lands, purportedly for leaking official secrets. No further arguments were submitted due to non-response to the Commission's requests.
- Respondent
- The respondent did not submit arguments as the matter was determined at the admissibility stage based on the applicant's failure to demonstrate exhaustion of local remedies.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Article 56(5), African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights
A communication is inadmissible before the Commission if the complainant has not exhausted all available local remedies, unless it is shown that such remedies are unduly prolonged or ineffective.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Commission found that the complainant failed to respond to its requests for information regarding the exhaustion of local remedies. In the absence of evidence that local remedies had been pursued and exhausted, or that such remedies were unavailable or ineffective, the Commission was compelled to declare the communication inadmissible in accordance with Article 56(5) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.
Court disposition
communication declared inadmissible for lack of exhaustion of local remedies
- 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 Sixteenth Ordinary Session 25 October - 3 November 1994
SANA DUMBAYA v.
THE GAMBIA
DECISION
BEFORE: CHAIRMAN: Prof. Isaac Nguema
VICE CHAIRMAN: Dr. Mohamed H. Ben Salem COMMISSIONERS: Prof. Emmanuel V. O. Dankwa, Mr. Sourahata B. Semega Janneh, Mr. Robert H. Kisanga, Dr. Vera V. B. S. Duarte-Martins, Dr. Ibrahim A. Badawi Ei-Sheikh, Prof. U. Oji Umozurike
Citation: Dumbaya v. Gam., Comm. 127/94, 8th ACHPR AAR Annex VI (1994-1995) Publications: IHRDA, Compilation of Decisions on Communications of the African Commission On Human and Peoples' Rights Extracted from the Commission's Activity Reports 1994-2001, at 103 (2002); Documents of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, at 397 (Malcolm D. Evans & Rachel Murray eds., 2001); (2000) AHRLR 103 (ACHPR 1995)
FACTS
1. Mr. Dumbuya complains that he was working as a registry clerk for the Ministry for Local Government and Lands from January to July 1992. In July 1992 he was dismissed under unclear circumstances, allegedly for leaking official secrets.
DECISION
2. The complainant has failed or neglected to respond to two requests by the Commission for information whether all local remedies have been exhausted. In the circumstances the Commission during its 16th Session declared the communication inadmissible on account of lack of exhaustion of local remedies.
.
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.