Share
Kalenga v Zambia (Communication 11 of 1988) [1994] ACHPR 5 (27 April 1994)
- Citation
- [1994] ACHPR 5
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights
- Posture
- Human Rights Communication / Amicable Settlement
- Case number
- Communication 11 of 1988
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights
- Posture
- Human Rights Communication / Amicable Settlement
- Case number
- Communication 11 of 1988
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Commission determined that the complaint of false imprisonment was resolved through an amicable settlement facilitated by a member of the Commission. As the applicant was released and both parties reached an agreement, the Commission closed the file in accordance with Article 97 of its Rules of Procedure and Article 56(1) of the Charter. No further adjudication was necessary.
Court disposition
file_closed_amicable_settlement
Orders
- The file is closed following the amicable settlement and release of the applicant.
02
Material facts
Parties
Henry Kalenga
ApplicantRepublic of Zambia
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Human Rights Communication / Amicable Settlement
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the detention of Henry Kalenga constituted false imprisonment under the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.
- 02
Whether the amicable settlement effected by the Commission member was sufficient to resolve the complaint.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant alleged that he was unlawfully detained, amounting to false imprisonment, and sought redress under the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.
- Respondent
- The respondent did not submit formal arguments; the matter was resolved through an amicable settlement facilitated by a member of the African Commission.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Article 6, African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights
Protection against arbitrary arrest and detention is guaranteed under the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.
- 02
Article 97, Rules of Procedure of the African Commission
The Commission may close a file upon amicable settlement between the parties.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Commission determined that the complaint of false imprisonment was resolved through an amicable settlement facilitated by a member of the Commission. As the applicant was released and both parties reached an agreement, the Commission closed the file in accordance with Article 97 of its Rules of Procedure and Article 56(1) of the Charter. No further adjudication was necessary.
Court disposition
file_closed_amicable_settlement
- The file is closed following the amicable settlement and release of the applicant.
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
HENRY KALENGA v. ZAMBIA
DECISION
- Citation: Henry Kalenga v. Zambia, Comm. 11/88, 7th ACHPR AAR Annex IX (19931994) - 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 366 (2002); Documents of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, at 339 (Malcolm D. Evans & Rachel Murray eds., 2001); (2000) AHRLR 321 (ACHPR 1994)
A COMMUNICATION ON FALSE IMPRISONMENT, DATED AUGUST 2 1988
[1] The author (victim) was released after a member of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights effected an amicable settlement. This file is closed. (Article 97 of the Rules of Procedure; Article 56, 1 of the Charter)
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.