Share
International PEN v Malawi (Communication 42 of 1990) [1990] ACHPR 7 (28 April 1990)
- Citation
- [1990] ACHPR 7
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights
- Posture
- Communication / Admissibility
- Case number
- Communication 42 of 1990
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights
- Posture
- Communication / Admissibility
- Case number
- Communication 42 of 1990
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Commission found that since Malawi was not a party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights at the time of the communication, the complaint could not be entertained. The Charter and the Commission's Rules of Procedure require that only communications against state parties to the Charter are admissible. Therefore, the communication was declared inadmissible for lack of jurisdiction ratione personae.
Court disposition
communication declared inadmissible
Orders
- The communication is declared inadmissible.
02
Material facts
Parties
International PEN
ApplicantMalawi
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Communication / Admissibility
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
Whether the communication is admissible against a state that is not a party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- International PEN submitted a communication alleging denial of the right to life and other violations by Malawi, seeking the Commission's intervention under the African Charter.
- Respondent
- Malawi did not respond, but the Commission considered the admissibility in light of Malawi's status regarding the Charter.
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 that is not a party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Commission found that since Malawi was not a party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights at the time of the communication, the complaint could not be entertained. The Charter and the Commission's Rules of Procedure require that only communications against state parties to the Charter are admissible. Therefore, the communication was declared inadmissible for lack of jurisdiction ratione personae.
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
25 April 1990 Communication No. 42/90
AFRICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES' RIGHTS Seventh Ordinary Session 18-28 April 1990
INTERNATIONAL PEN v. MALAWI
DECISION
Citation: Int'l PEN v. Malawi, Comm. 42/90, 7th ACHPR AAR Annex IX (1993–1994) 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 154 (2002); Documents of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, at 344 (Malcolm D. Evans & Rachel Murray eds., 2001)
COMMUNICATION ON DENIAL OF THE RIGHT TO LIFE, ETC; DATED MARCH 12, 1990
- [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 Seventh Ordinary Session held in Banjul, The Gambia, from 18 to 28 April 1990; - [3] Has taken the following decision: - [4] At its sitting on Wednesday 25 April, 1990; - [5] Considering that the communication is directed against a State non-party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights; - [6] 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.