Uganda Case Law

Mr. Mohammed Abdel Hay Faramawy and 2 Ors (Represented by Dr. Abdel Hay Faramawy and 4 Ors) v Arab Republic of Egypt (Communication 637 of 2016; Communication 639 of 2016)

Mr. Mohammed Abdel Hay Faramawy and 2 Ors (Represented by Dr. Abdel Hay Faramawy and 4 Ors) v Arab Republic of Egypt (Communication 637 of 2016; Communication 639 of 2016) [2020] ACHPR 4 (17 August 2020)

Court

African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Communication 637 of 2016 ; Communication 639 of 2016

The African Commission struck out two joined communications against Egypt for want of diligent prosecution after complainants missed admissibility deadlines.

• Enforced Disappearance
• Torture And Inhuman Treatment
• Right To Fair Trial
• Arbitrary Detention
• Judicial Independence
• Want-of-diligent-prosecution

Read case analysis

Elshenna v Arab Republic of Egypt (Communication 592 of 2015)

Elshenna v Arab Republic of Egypt (Communication 592 of 2015) [2018] ACHPR 125 (18 October 2018)

Court

African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Communication 592 of 2015

The African Commission found that the complainant failed to submit evidence and arguments on admissibility within the original and extended deadlines, despite being granted multiple opportunities and receiving proper notification. The Commission determined that more than three months had lapsed since the expiry of the last extension, with no submissions received. Based on the Rules of Procedure and established jurisprudence, the Commission concluded that the complainant had shown no interest in prosecuting the communication. Accordingly, the communication was struck out for lack of diligent p…

Source excerpt

• Right To Fair Trial
• Enforced Disappearance
• Torture And Inhuman Treatment
• Discriminatory Segregation
• Denial Of Access To Court

Read case analysis

Dahrooj and Others v Arab Republic of Egypt (Communication 614 of 2016)

Dahrooj and Others v Arab Republic of Egypt (Communication 614 of 2016) [2018] ACHPR 126 (18 October 2018)

Court

African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Communication 614 of 2016

The African Commission struck out a communication against Egypt after the complainants failed to file admissibility submissions within the required time.

• Right To Fair Trial
• Torture And Inhuman Treatment
• Enforced Disappearance
• Discrimination
• Judicial Independence
• Diligent-prosecution

Read case analysis

Odeh and Others v Arab Republic of Egypt (Communication 625 of 2016)

Odeh and Others v Arab Republic of Egypt (Communication 625 of 2016) [2018] ACHPR 121 (18 October 2018)

Court

African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Communication 625 of 2016

The Commission found that the complainant failed to submit evidence and arguments on admissibility within the original and extended deadlines, despite having received adequate notice and additional time. The Commission's rules and prior jurisprudence establish that failure to prosecute a communication diligently, including non-compliance with procedural deadlines, warrants striking out the communication. The Commission was satisfied that the complainant received all relevant correspondence and opportunities to comply, and therefore, in accordance with its rules and consistent with previous de…

Source excerpt

• Admissibility Requirements
• Diligent Prosecution
• Right To Fair Trial
• Enforced Disappearance
• Torture And Inhuman Treatment

Read case analysis

Bahieddin Ahmed v Egypt (Communication 615 of 2016)

Bahieddin Ahmed v Egypt (Communication 615 of 2016) [2018] ACHPR 123 (18 October 2018)

Court

African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Communication 615 of 2016

The African Commission struck out Communication 615/16 against Egypt for lack of diligent prosecution after the complainant failed to file admissibility submissions on time.

• Right To Fair Trial
• Enforced Disappearance
• Judicial Independence
• Exhaustion Of Domestic Remedies
• Diligent Prosecution
• African-commission

Read case analysis

Subaie v Arab Republic of Egypt (Communication 612 of 2016)

Subaie v Arab Republic of Egypt (Communication 612 of 2016) [2018] ACHPR 138 (6 March 2018)

Court

African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Communication 612 of 2016

The African Commission struck out a communication against Egypt after the complainants failed to file admissibility submissions or seek more time.

• Right To Fair Trial
• Enforced Disappearance
• Torture And Inhuman Treatment
• Discrimination
• Access To Justice
• Human-rights-communication

Read case analysis

Sarni and Another (Represented by European Alliance for Human Rights) v Arab Republic of Egypt (Communication 574 /15)

Sarni and Another (Represented by European Alliance for Human Rights) v Arab Republic of Egypt (Communication 574 /15) [2018] ACHPR 139 (22 February 2018)

Court

African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Communication 574 /15

The African Commission found that the complainant failed to submit arguments and evidence on admissibility within the prescribed period, despite multiple reminders and extensions. The Commission determined that the complainant showed no interest in prosecuting the communication, and in accordance with its Rules of Procedure and established jurisprudence, decided to strike out the communication for lack of diligent prosecution. The decision was based on procedural grounds rather than the merits of the alleged human rights violations.

Source excerpt

• Right To Life
• Fair Trial
• Prohibition Of Torture
• Enforced Disappearance
• Discrimination
• Diligent Prosecution

Read case analysis

Zitha and Another v Republic of Mozambique (Communication 361 of 2008)

Zitha and Another v Republic of Mozambique (Communication 361 of 2008) [2011] ACHPR 93 (3 March 2011)

Court

African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Communication 361 of 2008

The African Commission determined that enforced disappearance is a continuing violation, thus establishing its competence ratione temporis to consider the communication. However, the Commission found that the applicants did not sufficiently attempt to exhaust available judicial remedies in Mozambique, as required by Article 56(5) of the African Charter. The measures taken by the second victim, such as contacting political figures and international organizations, did not constitute judicial or institutionalized administrative remedies. Furthermore, the Commission held that the communication wa…

Source excerpt

• Enforced Disappearance
• Admissibility Requirements
• Continuing Violation
• Exhaustion Of Local Remedies
• International Human Rights Obligations

Read case analysis