Download

Uganda Judgment

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Sandwidi v Faso and Others [2020] AfCHPR 36 (15 July 2020)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The Court determined that the two applications, both directed against the same respondent states and arising from the same factual circumstances regarding the recruitment and dismissal of Elie Sandwidi, are sufficiently interrelated. The legal characterisation and alleged violations are identical, and the reliefs sought are the same. Joinder is therefore appropriate to avoid irreconcilable solutions, promote judicial economy, and ensure the proper administration of justice. The Court exercised its discretionary power under Rule 54 to order the joinder of the cases, consolidating them for further proceedings.

Court disposition

Applications joined and consolidated for further proceedings.

Orders

  • The joinder of Applications No. 014/2020 and 017/2020 and related pleadings is ordered.
  • Henceforth, the Applications shall be referred to as 'Consolidated Applications No. 014/2020 and 017/2020 - Elie Sandwidi and Another v. Burkina Faso and Three Other States'.
  • This Order and the pleadings relating to the above referred Matters shall be served on all the Parties.

02

Material facts

Parties

Elie Sandwidi

Applicant Counsel: Self-represented

Burkinabe Movement for Human and Peoples' Rights (MBDHP)

Applicant Counsel: Chrysogone Zougmore

Burkina Faso

Respondent

Republic of Benin

Respondent

Republic of Cote d'Ivoire

Respondent

Republic of Mali

Respondent

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Joinder Application / Order

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
Both applicants allege similar violations arising from the recruitment and dismissal of Elie Sandwidi at the Court of Justice of WAEMU, challenging the legality of the dismissal and seeking reinstatement or compensation. They claim violations of equal protection, dignity, right to be heard, and property rights under the African Charter, and request similar provisional measures.
Respondent
The Republic of Mali, representing the respondent states, requested joinder under Rule 54, arguing that the subject matter of both applications is similar and that the disputes are sufficiently interrelated to justify joint examination by the Court.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 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.

  2. 02

    ICJ, Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua), Joint Cases, Order of 17/4/2013, § 18

    Joinder is consonant with the principles of sound administration of justice and judicial economy.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The Court determined that the two applications, both directed against the same respondent states and arising from the same factual circumstances regarding the recruitment and dismissal of Elie Sandwidi, are sufficiently interrelated. The legal characterisation and alleged violations are identical, and the reliefs sought are the same. Joinder is therefore appropriate to avoid irreconcilable solutions, promote judicial economy, and ensure the proper administration of justice. The Court exercised its discretionary power under Rule 54 to order the joinder of the cases, consolidating them for further proceedings.

Obiter and limits

  • Joinder must be consonant not only with the principle of the sound administration of justice but also with the imperatives of judicial economy.
  • The fact that the applications are directed against the same respondent states and arise from similar facts supports the appropriateness of joinder.

Court disposition

Applications joined and consolidated for further proceedings.

  • The joinder of Applications No. 014/2020 and 017/2020 and related pleadings is ordered.
  • Henceforth, the Applications shall be referred to as 'Consolidated Applications No. 014/2020 and 017/2020 - Elie Sandwidi and Another v. Burkina Faso and Three Other States'.
  • This Order and the pleadings relating to the above referred Matters shall be served on all 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.

Source document

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Judgment

[2020] AfCHPR 36

![](_page_0_Picture_0.jpeg)

THE MATTERS OF

1. ELIE SANDWIDI V. BURKINA FASO REPUBLIC OF BENIN REPUBLIC OF COTE D'IVOIRE REPUBLIC OF MALI

APPLICATION No. 014/2020

AND

2. BURKINABE MOVEMENT FOR HUMAN AND PEOPLES' RIGHTS

V.

BURKINA FASO

AND

THREE OTHER STATES

APPLICATION No. 017/2020

ORDER (JOINDER OF CASES) 15 JULY 2020

![](_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg)

J

The Court composed of: Ben KIOKO, Vice-President; Rafaa BEN ACHOUR, Angelo V. MATUSSE, Suzanne MENGUE, M-Therese MUKAMULISA, Tujilane R. CHIZUMILA, Chafika BENSAOULA, Blaise TCHIKAYA, Stella I. ANUKAM, Imani D. ABOUD - 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 as "the Rules"), Judge Sylvain ORE, President of the Court and a national of Cote d'Ivoire, did not hear the Application,

In the Matters of:

1. ELIE SANDWIDI

Self-represented

v.

BURKINA FASO, REPUBLIC OF BENIN, REPUBLIC OF COTE D'IVOIRE AND REPUBLIC OF MALI

APPLICATION No. 014/2020

AND

2. BURKINABE MOVEMENT FOR HUMAN AND PEOPLES' RIGHTS (MBDHP)

Represented by its President, Chrysogone ZOUGMORE

v.

BURKINA FASO AND THREE OTHER STATES

APPLICATION No. 017/2020

After deliberation,

- 1. Considering the Application dated 24 February 2020 filed by Mr Elie Sandwidi (hereinafter referred to as "the First Applicant"), against Burkina Faso, the Republic of Benin, the Republic of Cote d'Ivoire and the Republic of Mali (hereinafter referred to as "the Respondent States"), and registered at the Registry of the Court on 3 March 2020. - 2. Considering the Application dated 30 April 2020 filed by the Burkinabe Movement for Human and Peoples' Rights (hereinafter referred as "Second Applicant"), against the Respondent States, and registered at the Registry of the Court on 11 May 2020. - 3. Considering that, in its submissions of 2 May 2020 received at the Registry on 3 June 2020, the Republic of Mali requested, pursuant to Rule 54 of the Rules, the joinder of the two cases on the ground that the subject matter of the two applications was similar, namely, request for reinstatement or, alternatively, compensation of Elie Sandwidi; and thus, that the two disputes are sufficiently interrelated to allow the Court to examine them together. - 4. Considering that Rule 54 of the Rules provides that: "The 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 that it follows from the

above-cited provision that the Court may exercise its discretionary power to order the joinder of cases where two or more cases which are not identical are brought before it, but are such that it is in the interest of proper justice to hear and determine them at the same time in order to avoid solutions which might be irreconcilable. Such joinder must be consonant not only with the principle of the sound administration of justice but also with the imperatives of judicial economy.[1](#page-2-0)

<span id="page-2-0"></span><sup>1</sup> - ICJ, *Certain Activities Carried Outby Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua),* Joint Cases, Order of 17/4/2013,§ 18.

- 6. Considering that, in the present case, the fact remains that the said Applications are directed against the same Respondent States, namely: Burkina Faso, the Republic of Benin, the Republic of Cote d'Ivoire and the Republic of Mali. - 7. Considering, moreover, that the facts in support of the two Applications are similar in the sense that they arise from the recruitment of the First Applicant at the Court of Justice of the West African Economic and Monetary Union (CJ - WAEMU) and his dismissal, the legality of which he unsuccessfully challenged before the Advisory Committee of the WAEMU Commission *(WAEMU CCP),* the Council of Ministers and the Authority of Heads of State and Government of WAEMU as well as before the said Court. - 8. Considering, further, that the legal characterisation drawn from the facts is the same in both cases, in that the Applicants allege the same violations, that is, violation of the right to equal protection of the law, the right to respect for the inherent dignity of the human person, the right to be heard and the right to property, as enshrined in Articles 3(2), 5, 7 and 14 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, respectively. - 9. Considering, lastly, that the Applicants have made the same requests on the merits and sought *pendente lite,* the same provisional measures. - 10. Considering that it follows from the foregoing that the

joinder of these two cases is appropriate in fact and in law, pursuant to the above-mentioned article, and is consistent with the principles governing the proper administration of justice. - 11. Considering that it is therefore appropriate to order the joinder of the cases filed by the First Applicant and the Second Applicant, against the same Respondent States, namely: Burkina Faso, the Republic of Benin, the Republic of Cote d'Ivoire and the Republic of Mali.

OPERATIVE PART

For these reasons,

THE COURT,

Unanimously, Orders

- i. 7Tie joinder of the above referred Applications and related pleadings. - ii. That henceforth, the Applications shall be referred to as "Consolidated Applications No. 014/2020 and 017/2020 - Elie Sandwidi and Another v. Burkina Faso and Three Other States - iii. The consequent upon the joinder, this Order and the pleadings relating to the above referred Matters shall be served on all the Parties.

Signed:

Ben KIOKO, Vice - President;

and

Robert ENO, Registrar.

![](_page_4_Picture_12.jpeg)

![](_page_4_Picture_13.jpeg)

Done at Arusha, this Fifteenth Day of July in the year Two Thousand and Twenty in English and French, the French text being authoritative.

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.

ICJ, Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua), Joint Cases, Order of 17/4/2013, § 18

Case cited

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.

Rule 54 of the Rules of Court

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Articles 3(2), 5, 7 and 14 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights

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.