Download

Uganda Judgment

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Hassani v Tanzania (Application No. 029/2015) [2019] AfCHPR 36 (26 September 2019)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The Court determined that, in the interests of justice, the proceedings should be re-opened to allow the Respondent State's response to the Applicant's submissions on reparations to be considered. The Court found that procedural fairness and the right to be heard necessitate giving both parties adequate opportunity to present their arguments, especially where delays are explained by administrative reforms. The Respondent State's response is deemed duly filed and will be served on the Applicant, who is granted thirty days to reply. This ensures that the reparations phase is conducted with full participation and respect for due process.

Court disposition

Order granting re-opening of pleadings and acceptance of Respondent State's late response.

Orders

  • Proceedings in Application No. 029/2015 Yusuph Hassani v United Republic of Tanzania are re-opened.
  • The Respondent State's response to the Applicant's submissions on reparations is deemed duly filed and will be served on the Applicant.
  • The Applicant may file a reply within thirty days of receipt of the Respondent State's response.

02

Material facts

Parties

Yusuph Hassani

Applicant

United Republic of Tanzania

Respondent Counsel: Dr Clement J Mashamba, Ms Sarah Mwaipopo, Ambassador Baraka Luvanda, Ms Nkasori Sarakikya, Mr Mark Mulwambo, Ms Sylvia Matiku, Mr Elisha Suka

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Miscellaneous Application / Order on Re Opening of Pleadings

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The Applicant filed submissions on reparations and was notified of the close of pleadings. He was given an opportunity to respond to the Respondent State's late submissions within fifteen days.
Respondent
The Respondent State requested an extension of time to file its response to the Applicant's submissions on reparations, citing delays due to reforms in the State Law Offices. The response was filed together with the extension request.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Rule 8(2) of the Rules of Court

    The interests of justice may require the re-opening of pleadings to ensure all parties are heard and submissions considered.

  2. 02

    Article 22 of the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights

    Procedural fairness requires that parties be given reasonable opportunity to respond to submissions affecting their rights.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The Court determined that, in the interests of justice, the proceedings should be re-opened to allow the Respondent State's response to the Applicant's submissions on reparations to be considered. The Court found that procedural fairness and the right to be heard necessitate giving both parties adequate opportunity to present their arguments, especially where delays are explained by administrative reforms. The Respondent State's response is deemed duly filed and will be served on the Applicant, who is granted thirty days to reply. This ensures that the reparations phase is conducted with full participation and respect for due process.

Court disposition

Order granting re-opening of pleadings and acceptance of Respondent State's late response.

  • Proceedings in Application No. 029/2015 Yusuph Hassani v United Republic of Tanzania are re-opened.
  • The Respondent State's response to the Applicant's submissions on reparations is deemed duly filed and will be served on the Applicant.
  • The Applicant may file a reply within thirty 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.

Source document

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Judgment

[2019] AfCHPR 36

| | | | | --- | --- | --- | | AFRICAN UNION | ![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

YUSUPH HASSANI

V.

UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA

APPLICATION NO. 029/2015

ORDER ON RE-OPENING OF PLEADINGS

26 SEPTEMBER 2019

The Court composed of: Sylvain ORÉ, President; Ben KIOKO, Vice-President; Rafaâ BEN ACHOUR, Ângelo V. MATUSSE, Suzanne MENGUE, M-Thérèse MUKAMULISA 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 8(2) of the Rules of Court (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules”), Judge Imani D. ABOUD, member of the Court and a national of Tanzania, did not hear the Application.

In the matter of:

Yusuph HASSANI

*self-represented,*

versus

UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA,

represented by:

1. Dr Clement J MASHAMBA, Solicitor General, Office of the Solicitor General 2. Ms. Sarah MWAIPOPO,Acting Deputy Attorney General and Director of the Division of Constitutional Affairs and Human Rights, Attorney General’s Chambers 3. Ambassador Baraka LUVANDA, Head of Legal Unit, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, East Africa, Regional and International Cooperation 4. Ms. Nkasori SARAKIKYA, Assistant Director, Human Rights, Principal State Attorney, Attorney General’s Chambers 5. Mr. Mark MULWAMBO, Principal State Attorney, Attorney General’s Chambers 6. Ms Sylvia MATIKU, Principal State Attorney, Attorney General’s Chambers 7. Mr. Elisha SUKA, Foreign Service Officer, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, East Africa, Regional and International Cooperation. 8. THE PARTIES 9. The Applicant, Mr. Yusuph Hassani is a national of the United Republic of Tanzania. He was convicted of the offence of armed robbery on 31 August 2006 and sentenced to thirty (30) years imprisonment which he is currently serving.

10. The Respondent State, the United Republic of Tanzania, became a party to, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (hereinafter referred to as “the Charter”) on 21 October 1986 and to 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”) on 10 February 2006. On 29 March 2010, the Respondent State deposited the Declaration as prescribed under Article 34(6) of the Protocol. 11. SUBJECT MATTER OF THE APPLICATION 12. The Application, filed on 23 November 2015, is based on the Respondent State’s alleged violations of the Applicant’s right be heard in the course of his trial and appeals on the charge of armed robbery.

1. SUMMARY OF PROCEDURE BEFORE THE COURT 2. The Parties exchanged pleadings on the merits. The Applicant filed his submissions on reparations. On 8 June 2019 the Parties were notified of the close of pleadings.

3. On 26 August 2019 the Respondent State filed a request for extension of time to file its response to the Applicant’s submissions on reparations on the basis that the delay in responding was due to the reforms in the State Law Offices. The Respondent State filed the response to the submissions together with the request for extension of time.

4. On 29 August 2019 the Respondent State’s request was sent to the Applicant for his observations to be submitted within fifteen (15) days. 5. THE COURT: 6. Orders that, in the interests of justice, proceedings in *Application No. 029/2015 Yusuph Hassani v United Republic of Tanzania* be and are hereby re-opened 7. The Respondent State’s Response to the Applicant’s submissions on reparations is deemed as duly filed and to be served on the Applicant.

8. The Applicant’s Reply, if any, should be filed within thirty (30) days of receipt of the Respondent State’s Response.

Signed:

Sylvain ORÉ, President

and Robert ENO, Registrar.

Done at Arusha, this Twenty Sixth Day of September in the Year 2019.

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 8(2) 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.