Uganda Case Law

Dicko and Others v Faso (Application No. 037/2020)

Dicko and Others v Faso (Application No. 037/2020) [2024] AfCHPR 25 (13 November 2024)

Court

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Application No. 037/2020

Judge

Aboud P, Adjei J, Anukam J, Ben Achour J, Bensaoula J, Eno R, Gaswaga J, Mengue J, Ntsebeza J, Sacko VP, Tchikaya J

The Court found that the Applicants did not exhaust local remedies as required by Article 56(5) of the Charter and Rule 50(2)(e) of the Rules. Although the Applicants petitioned the Constitutional Council, the Council dismissed their challenge on procedural grounds, indicating that constitutional review of enacted laws must be brought before ordinary courts in the context of a pending case. The Applicants did not pursue this avenue. The Court reiterated that exhaustion of local remedies is a cumulative admissibility requirement and, since it was not met, the Application was declared inadmissi…

Source excerpt

• Electoral Code Amendment
• Right To Participate In Elections
• Exhaustion Of Local Remedies
• Constitutional Review
• Jurisdiction Of Regional Court

Zorgati v Republic of Tunisia (Application No. 016/2021)

Zorgati v Republic of Tunisia (Application No. 016/2021) [2024] AfCHPR 32 (13 November 2024)

Court

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Application No. 016/2021

Judge

Aboud P, Adjei J, Anukam J, Bensaoula J, Chizumila J, Eno R, Gaswaga J, Mengue J, Ntsebeza J, Sacko VP, Tchikaya J

The Court found that the adoption of the 27 January 2014 Constitution by a Constituent National Assembly elected by universal suffrage constituted indirect participation of the people and did not violate the right to self-determination under Article 20 of the Charter. The absence of a referendum was not mandatory under the Charter or other human rights instruments. However, the Court held that the Respondent State violated Article 26 by interfering in the independence of the judiciary, specifically through the dissolution of the High Judicial Council and failure to establish the Constitutiona…

Source excerpt

• Self Determination
• Judicial Independence
• Separation Of Powers
• Constitutional Review
• Legislative Independence

Belguith v Republic of Tunisia (Application No. 017/2021)

Belguith v Republic of Tunisia (Application No. 017/2021) [2022] AfCHPR 35 (22 September 2022)

Court

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Application No. 017/2021

Judge

Aboud P, Adjei J, Anukam J, Bensaoula J, Chizumila J, Kioko J, Mengue J, Ntsebeza J, Sacko J, Tchikaya VP

The Court found that the Respondent State violated the applicant's right to be heard under Article 7(1)(a) of the Charter by failing to provide access to a competent tribunal for constitutional review of presidential decrees, as the Constitutional Court had not been operationalised and no alternative remedy existed. The Court further held that the suspension of Parliament and abrogation of constitutional provisions through presidential decrees, without adherence to constitutional procedures and without considering less restrictive measures, constituted a disproportionate and unlawful restrict…

Source excerpt

• Right To Be Heard
• Political Participation
• Self Determination
• Constitutional Review
• Judicial Independence

Abess v Republic of Tunisia (Application No. 026/2018)

Abess v Republic of Tunisia (Application No. 026/2018) [2022] AfCHPR 80 (23 June 2022)

Court

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Application No. 026/2018

Judge

Aboud P, Anukam J, Bensaoula J, Chizumila J, Kioko J, Mengue J, Mukamulisa J, Ntsebeza J, Sacko J, Tchikaya VP

The Court found that the Applicant repeatedly failed to comply with requests to submit supporting documents and respond to the Respondent State's submissions, despite multiple reminders and extensions. Proofs of delivery confirmed that the Applicant received all notifications. As a legal professional, the Applicant was expected to understand the importance of diligence in pursuing his case, including providing evidence and responding to procedural requests. The Applicant's persistent inaction and lack of justification for non-compliance constituted a failure to pursue his case within the mean…

Source excerpt

• Presidential Election Disqualification
• Judicial Impartiality
• Access To Court
• Constitutional Review
• Electoral Law

Tivane v Mozambique (Communication 434 of 2012)

Tivane v Mozambique (Communication 434 of 2012) [2017] ACHPR 139 (23 October 2017)

Court

African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Communication 434 of 2012

The African Commission found the communication inadmissible because the complainant did not exhaust available domestic remedies, including a constitutional challenge.

• Right To Property
• Expropriation
• Constitutional Review
• Admissibility Requirements
• Exhaustion Of Local Remedies
• Admissibility

Mwenda and Another v Attorney General

Mwenda and Another v Attorney General [2010] UGCC 9 (25 August 2010)

Court

Constitutional Court of Uganda

Judge

Byamugisha, JA, Kavuma, JA, Mukasa-Kikonyogo, DCJ, Nshimye, JA, Engwau, JA

Sections 39 and 40 of the Penal Code Act, which criminalize sedition, are inconsistent with Articles 29(1)(a) and 43(2)(c) of the Constitution because they impose vague, overly broad, and unjustifiable limitations on the right to freedom of expression. The respondent failed to prove that these limitations are acceptable and demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society. The provisions catch a wide range of speech, including legitimate criticism of government and leaders, and create uncertainty about the boundaries of lawful expression, thereby infringing constitutional rights. The…

Source excerpt

• Freedom Of Expression
• Sedition
• Limitations On Rights
• Sectarianism
• Constitutional Review
• Criminal Defamation

Ivorian Human Rights Movement v Cote D'Ivoire (Communication 262 of 2002)

Ivorian Human Rights Movement v Cote D'Ivoire (Communication 262 of 2002) [2008] ACHPR 84 (22 May 2008)

Court

African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Communication 262 of 2002

The Commission found that Article 26 of Law No. 98-750 was discriminatory and violated Articles 2 and 14 of the African Charter by depriving a category of persons of property rights based solely on origin, without justification of public need or general interest. The Commission held that local remedies were not available to the applicant, as the applicant lacked standing to challenge the law domestically. The subsequent amendment of the law did not negate the violations that occurred during its six years of application. The Commission rejected the respondent's argument that the communication…

Source excerpt

• Discrimination In Land Law
• Right To Property
• Expropriation Without Compensation
• Equality Before The Law
• Constitutional Review
• Remedies For Human Rights Violations

FIDH and Others v Senegal (Communication 304 of 2005)

FIDH and Others v Senegal (Communication 304 of 2005) [2005] ACHPR 75 (29 November 2005)

Court

African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Communication 304 of 2005

The African Commission held that the complaint against Senegal’s Ezzan amnesty law was inadmissible because the complainants had not exhausted local remedies.

• Amnesty Legislation
• Exhaustion Of Local Remedies
• Access To Justice
• Constitutional Review
• Exhaustion-of-local-remedies
• Amnesty-laws