Share
Nondo v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 040/2020; Application No. 043/2020) [2021] AfCHPR 49 (30 March 2021)
- Citation
- [2021] AfCHPR 49
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- African Court on Human and Peoples Rights
- Panel
- Anukam J, Ben Achour J, Bensaoula J, Chizumila J, Kioko VP, Matusse J, Mengue J, Mukamulisa J, Orè P, Tchikaya J
- Case number
- Application No. 040/2020 ; Application No. 043/2020
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- African Court on Human and Peoples Rights
- Panel
- Anukam J, Ben Achour J, Bensaoula J, Chizumila J, Kioko VP, Matusse J, Mengue J, Mukamulisa J, Orè P, Tchikaya J
- Case number
- Application No. 040/2020 ; Application No. 043/2020
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Court found that both applications were filed against the same Respondent State and raised broadly similar challenges regarding the consonance of the Respondent State's electoral laws with international human rights instruments. The Court determined that joinder of the cases was appropriate in fact and in law, pursuant to Rule 62 of the Rules, and consistent with the principles of sound administration of justice and judicial economy. The joinder would facilitate efficient adjudication and avoid duplication of proceedings, thereby serving the interests of justice.
Court disposition
applications_joined
Orders
- The joinder of Application No. 040/2020 Abdul Omary Nondo v United Republic of Tanzania and Application No. 043/2020 Deusdedit Valentine Rweyemamu and Paul Revocatus Kaunda v United Republic of Tanzania and related pleadings.
- Henceforth, the joined Applications shall be referred to as 'Consolidated Applications No. 040/2020 and 043/2020 – Abdul Omary Nondo and others v United Republic of Tanzania'.
- This Order shall be duly notified to the Parties.
02
Material facts
Parties
Abdul Omary Nondo
Applicant Counsel: Jebra Kambole, Law Guards AdvocatesDeusdedit Valentine Rweyemamu
Applicant Counsel: Prisca Chogero, Centre for Strategic LitigationPaul Revocatus Kaunda
Applicant Counsel: Prisca Chogero, Centre for Strategic LitigationUnited Republic of Tanzania
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Order on Joinder
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the joinder of Application No. 040/2020 and Application No. 043/2020 is appropriate under Rule 62 of the Rules of Court.
- 02
Whether the cases raise broadly similar challenges against the electoral laws of the Respondent State.
- 03
Whether joinder serves the interests of judicial economy and proper administration of justice.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicants in both cases challenge the electoral laws of the Respondent State, arguing that they are inconsistent with the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They seek orders for the Respondent State to amend its constitutional and legal framework to bring it into conformity with these international instruments.
- Respondent
- The Respondent State's arguments are not detailed in this order, as the matter concerns procedural joinder rather than substantive merits. The Respondent State is the common respondent in both applications.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Rule 62 of the Rules of Court
The Court may, at any stage of the proceedings, order the joinder or disjoinder of cases and pleadings as it deems appropriate.
- 02
Elie Sandwidi v. Burkina Faso, Republic of Benin and Republic of Côte d'Ivoire, Republic of Mali; and Burkinabè Movement for Human and Peoples' Rights v. Burkina Faso and three other states ACtHPR Applications No. 014/2020 and No. 017/2020, Order on Joinder of Cases, 15 July 2020 § 5
Joinder of cases is permissible where it serves the proper administration of justice and judicial economy.
- 03
Certain Activities Carried out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v Nicaragua) (Joinder of Proceedings) 17 April 2013 § 18
Joinder must be consonant with the principle of sound administration of justice and judicial economy.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Court found that both applications were filed against the same Respondent State and raised broadly similar challenges regarding the consonance of the Respondent State's electoral laws with international human rights instruments. The Court determined that joinder of the cases was appropriate in fact and in law, pursuant to Rule 62 of the Rules, and consistent with the principles of sound administration of justice and judicial economy. The joinder would facilitate efficient adjudication and avoid duplication of proceedings, thereby serving the interests of justice.
Obiter and limits
- Joinder of cases is not only a matter of procedural convenience but also serves the imperatives of judicial economy.
- The joined applications shall henceforth be referred to as 'Consolidated Applications No. 040/2020 and 043/2020 – Abdul Omary Nondo and others v United Republic of Tanzania'.
Court disposition
applications_joined
- The joinder of Application No. 040/2020 Abdul Omary Nondo v United Republic of Tanzania and Application No. 043/2020 Deusdedit Valentine Rweyemamu and Paul Revocatus Kaunda v United Republic of Tanzania and related pleadings.
- Henceforth, the joined Applications shall be referred to as 'Consolidated Applications No. 040/2020 and 043/2020 – Abdul Omary Nondo and others v United Republic of Tanzania'.
- This Order shall be duly notified to the 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 | | |
THE MATTERS OF
1. ABDUL OMARY NONDO
V.
UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
APPLICATION No. 040/2020
2. DEUSDEDIT VALENTINE RWEYEMAMU
AND PAUL REVOCATUS KAUNDA
V.
UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
APPLICATION No. 043/2020
ORDER
(JOINDER OF CASES)
30 MARCH 2021
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.
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 9(2)[[1]](#footnote-1) 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:
Abdul Omary NONDO
Represented by Jebra KAMBOLE, Law Guards Advocates
Versus
UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
Application No. 040/2020
And
Deusdedit Valentine RWEYEMAMU and Paul Revocatus KAUNDA
Represented by Prisca CHOGERO, Centre for Strategic Litigation
Versus
UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
Application No. 043/2020
After deliberation:
Considering the Application No. 040/2020 filed on 19 November 2020 by Abdul Omary Nondo (hereinafter referred to as "the First Applicant") against the United Republic of Tanzania (hereinafter referred to as “the Respondent State”).
Considering also, Application No. 043/2020 filed on 19 November 2020 by Deusdedit Valentine Rweyemamu (hereinafter referred to as the Second Applicant) and Paul Revocatus Kaunda (hereinafter referred to as the Third Applicant) against the Respondent State.
Considering further that Rule 62 of the Rules provides that: "The Court may, at any stage of the proceedings, either on its own accord or upon an application by any of the parties, order the joinder or disjoinder of cases and pleadings as it deems appropriate."
Observing that it follows from Rule 62 that the Court may exercise its discretionary power to order the joinder of two or more cases where it is in the interest of the proper administration of justice to hear and determine them at the same time.[[2]](#footnote-2) Further observing that such joinder must be consonant not only with the principle of the sound administration of justice but also with the imperatives of judicial economy.[[3]](#footnote-3)
Noting that Applications Nos. 040/2020 and 043/2020 are filed against the same Respondent State.
Noting also that both Applications are raising broadly similar challenges against the electoral laws of the Respondent State more especially the consonance between the electoral laws and provisions of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Noting further that in both Applications, the Applicants pray that the Respondent State be ordered to amend its constitutional and legal framework.
Considering that it follows from the foregoing that the joinder of these two cases is appropriate in fact and in law, pursuant to Rule 62 of the Rules and is consistent with the principles governing the proper administration of justice.
Finding, therefore, that it is appropriate to order the joinder of Application No. 040/2020 and Application No. 043/2020 which have been filed against the same Respondent State
OPERATIVE PART
For these reasons,
THE COURT,
Unanimously,
Orders:
The joinder of Application No. 040/2020 Abdul Omary Nondo V United Republic of Tanzania and Application No. 043/2020 Deusdedit Valentine Rweyemamu and Paul Recovatus Kaunda v United Republic of Tanzania and related pleadings.
That henceforth, the joined Applications shall be referred to as "Consolidated Applications No. 040/2020 and 043/2020 – *Abdul Omary Nondo and others v United Republic of Tanzania*”.
The consequent upon the joinder, this Order shall be duly notified to the Parties.
Signed:
Sylvain ORE, President;
And Robert ENO, Registrar.
Done at Arusha, this Thirtieth Day of March in the Year Two Thousand and Twenty One, in English and French, the English text being authoritative.
1. Formerly Rule 8(2) of the Rules of 2 June 2010. [↑](#footnote-ref-1) 2. *Elie Sandwidi v. Burkina Faso, Republic of Benin* and *Republic of Côte d'ivoire, Republic of Mali; and Burkinabè Movement for Human and Peoples' Rights v. Burkina Faso and three other states* ACtHPR Applications No. 014/2020and No. 017/2020*,* Order on Joinder of Cases,15 July 2020 § 5. [↑](#footnote-ref-2) 3. *Certain Activities Carried out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v Nicaragua)* (Joinder of Proceedings) 17 April 2013 § 18. [↑](#footnote-ref-3)
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.