Share
Murimi and Others v Tanzania (Application No. 039/2019; Application No. 040/2019; Application No. 041/2019) [2019] AfCHPR 32 (26 September 2019)
- Citation
- [2019] AfCHPR 32
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- African Court on Human and Peoples Rights
- Panel
- Anukam J, Ben Achour J, Bensaoula J, Chizumila J, Eno R, Kioko VP, Matusse J, Mengue J, Mukamulisa J, Orè P, Tchikaya J
- Case number
- Application No. 039/2019 ; Application No. 040/2019 ; Application No. 041/2019
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- African Court on Human and Peoples Rights
- Panel
- Anukam J, Ben Achour J, Bensaoula J, Chizumila J, Eno R, Kioko VP, Matusse J, Mengue J, Mukamulisa J, Orè P, Tchikaya J
- Case number
- Application No. 039/2019 ; Application No. 040/2019 ; Application No. 041/2019
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Court determined that the three applications, filed separately by the applicants against the United Republic of Tanzania, arise from the same criminal proceedings, involve identical factual circumstances, and allege similar violations of rights. The applicants were co-accused in the murder trial and subsequent appeals, and the reliefs sought are substantially the same. Pursuant to Rule 54 of the Rules of Court, which allows for joinder of interrelated cases and pleadings where appropriate, the Court found that joinder is warranted both in fact and in law. The consolidation of these matters serves the good administration of justice and ensures procedural efficiency. Accordingly, the Court ordered the joinder of the cases and pleadings, and directed that the consolidated applications and related orders be served on all parties.
Court disposition
applications joined and consolidated
Orders
- The cases and pleadings in Applications No.039/2019, 040/2019, and 041/2019 are joined.
- The applications shall henceforth be referred to as Consolidated Applications No.039/2019, 040/2019, and 041/2019 Chacha Jeremiah Murimi and 2 Others v. United Republic of Tanzania.
- The order and pleadings relating to the joinder shall be served on all parties.
02
Material facts
Parties
Chacha Jeremiah Murimi
ApplicantMethew Jeremiah Daud
ApplicantPaschal Ligoye Mashiku
ApplicantUnited Republic of Tanzania
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Order for Joinder
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the applications should be joined due to similarity of facts, alleged violations, and reliefs sought.
- 02
Whether the joinder is appropriate in fact and in law under Rule 54 of the Rules of Court.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicants assert that they were co-accused in the same criminal proceedings for murder, arising from identical facts and circumstances. They allege similar violations of their rights by the respondent state, including errors in judicial decision-making, improper recording of their caution statements, and unreliable visual identification. The reliefs sought in each application are substantially the same.
- Respondent
- The respondent state did not submit separate arguments on the joinder at this stage. The applications were filed separately but concern the same criminal case and appellate proceedings.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Rule 54 of the Rules of Court
The Court may order the joinder of interrelated cases and pleadings where appropriate, both in fact and in law.
- 02
Practice of the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights
Joinder is justified where applications arise from the same facts, allege similar violations, and seek similar reliefs against the same respondent.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Court determined that the three applications, filed separately by the applicants against the United Republic of Tanzania, arise from the same criminal proceedings, involve identical factual circumstances, and allege similar violations of rights. The applicants were co-accused in the murder trial and subsequent appeals, and the reliefs sought are substantially the same. Pursuant to Rule 54 of the Rules of Court, which allows for joinder of interrelated cases and pleadings where appropriate, the Court found that joinder is warranted both in fact and in law. The consolidation of these matters serves the good administration of justice and ensures procedural efficiency. Accordingly, the Court ordered the joinder of the cases and pleadings, and directed that the consolidated applications and related orders be served on all parties.
Obiter and limits
- The joinder of cases promotes judicial economy and consistency in adjudication.
- The consolidation does not prejudice the parties' substantive rights or the merits of their individual claims.
Court disposition
applications joined and consolidated
- The cases and pleadings in Applications No.039/2019, 040/2019, and 041/2019 are joined.
- The applications shall henceforth be referred to as Consolidated Applications No.039/2019, 040/2019, and 041/2019 Chacha Jeremiah Murimi and 2 Others v. United Republic of Tanzania.
- The order and pleadings relating to the joinder shall be served on all parties.
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.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
African Court on Human and Peoples Rights
Judgment
| | | | | --- | --- | --- | | AFRICAN UNION |  | UNION AFRICAINE | |  | UNIÃO AFRICANA | | AFRICAN COURT ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES’ RIGHTS COUR AFRICAINE DES DROITS DE L’HOMME ET DES PEUPLES | | |
IN THE MATTERS OF
CHACHA JEREMIAH MURIMI
V.
UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
APPLICATION NO. 039/2019
AND
METHEW JEREMIAH DAUD
V.
UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
APPLICATION NO. 040/2019
AND
PASCHAL LIGOYE MASHIKU
V.
UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
APPLICATION NO.041/2019
ORDER FOR JOINDER OF CASES AND PLEADINGS
26 SEPTEMBER 2019
The Court composed of: Sylvain ORE, President, Ben KIOKO, Vice President, Rafaâ BEN ACHOUR, Angelo V. MATUSSE, Suzanne MENGUE, M-Thérèse MUKAMULISA, Tujilane R. CHIZUMILA, Chafika BENSAOULA, Blaise TCHIKAYA, Stella I. ANUKAM-Judges, and Robert ENO, Registrar.
In accordance with 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"), Justice Imani D. ABOUD, member of the Court and a national of Tanzania, did not hear the Application.
In the Matters of:
CHACHA JEREMIAH MURIMI
V.
UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
APPLICATION NO.039/2019
AND
METHEW JEREMIAH DAUD
V.
UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
APPLICATION NO. 040/2019
AND
PASCHAL LIGOYE MASHIKU
V.
UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
APPLICATION NO.041/2019
After deliberation,
1. Considering the Application dated 22 July 2019 and received at the Court on 7 August 2019, from Mr Chacha Jeremiah Murimi (hereinafter referred to as “First Applicant”) filed against the United Republic of Tanzania (hereinafter referred to as “Respondent State”); 2. Considering the Application dated 22 July 2019 and received at the Court on 7 August 2019, from Mr Methew Jeremiah Daud (hereinafter referred to as “Second Applicant”) filed against the Respondent State; 3. Considering the Application dated 22 July 2019 and received at the Court on 7 August 2019, from Mr Paschal Ligoye Mashiku (hereinafter referred to as “Third Applicant”) filed against the Respondent State; 4. Pursuant to Rule 54 of the Rules of Court provides “[t]he Court may at any stage of the pleadings either on its own volition or in response to an application by any of the parties, order the joinder of interrelated cases and pleadings where it deems it appropriate, both in fact and in law.”; 5. Considering the Applications have been filed differently against the same Respondent State by the above named Applicants; 6. Considering, the First, Second and Third Applicants state in their respective Applications that they were co-accused during the trial and appeals on charges of murder arising from the same facts in Criminal Case No. 231 of 2014 at the High Court of Tanzania and Criminal Appeal No. 551/2015 at
the Court of Appeal of Tanzania, and they have raised the same allegations of violations of their rights by the Respondent State; 7. Considering that the facts supporting the Applications are similar as they originate in the trial of the Applicants for murder of one Aron s/o Nongo, a person with albinism and their sentencing to death by the High Court Criminal Case No. 231 of 2014 on 16 October 2015, which judgment was upheld by the Court of Appeal of Tanzania on 4 April 2019; 8. Considering that the Applicants claim the judges of the Court of Appeal erred in their decision, and they are all challenging the procedure in relation to the recording of their caution and in addition they allege that their visual identification was not proper and that the reliefs sought are similar in nature; 9. Considering therefore that the facts supporting the Applications, the alleged violations and prayers made are similar, and given the identity of the Respondent State.
10. Mindful of allthe above, a joinder of cases and pleadings in relation to these Applications is appropriate in fact and in law and for the good administration of justice pursuant to Rule 54 of the Rules of the Court.
OPERATIVE PART
For these reasons:
The Court
*Unanimously*
*Orders:*
1. The joinder of cases and pleadings in the Applications filed by the Applicants against the Respondent State.
2. That the Applications henceforth be referred to as Consolidated Applications No.039/2019 , 040/2019 and 041/2019 Chacha Jeremiah Murimi and 2 Others v. United Republic of Tanzania.
3. That consequent upon the joinder of the two matters, the order and the pleadings relating thereto shall be served on all parties.
Signed:
Sylvain ORÉ, President
and Robert ENO, Registrar.
In accordance with Article 28 (7) of the Protocol and Rule 60 (5) of the Rules, the Separate Opinion of Justice Chafika Bensaoula is attached to this Order.
Done in Arusha this Twenty Sixth Day of September of the year Two Thousand and Nineteen in English and in French, the English text being authoritative.
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.