|
Back to Index
Concern
over ACHPR delays in considering cases
MISA-Zimbabwe
May 15, 2009
The Zimbabwe
Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR) on 14 May 2009 expressed serious
concern over the African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights's
(ACHPR) delays in considering cases brought before the Commission.
In a joint statement
with the International Centre on Legal Protection (Interights) and
Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa (IHRDA), during
the ongoing 45th Ordinary Session of the ACHPR in Banjul, The Gambia,
ZLHR regional manager Kucaca Phulu, noted that in some instances
it took between four to seven years for the Commission to consider
pending cases.
"We appreciate the
constraints faced by the Commission covering a vast continent of
53 diverse countries. However, the current delays are of serious
concern. Victims of human rights violations wait too long for a
decision from the Commission to validate their rights.
"Receiving a decision
in his or her favour is an important aspect of redress for all who
have suffered human rights violations. However, where the victim
of human rights violations has to wait an extra six years for the
Commission's decision, this aspect of the remedy is negated,"
he said.
Among the cases
that have been pending without being finalised by the Commission
for years is the joint communication filed by MISA-Zimbabwe, ZLHR
and the Independent Journalists Association of Zimbabwe (IJAZ) challenging
a number of sections of the repressive Access
to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA).
MISA-Zimbabwe,
ZLHR and IJAZ allege that provisions requiring registration and
accreditation of the media sector by the state appointed Media and
Information Commission are inconsistent with Article 9 of the African
Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights which guarantees
the right to freedom of expression.
Other cases before the
Commission include that of the Associated Newspapers of Zimbabwe
(ANZ) publishers of the banned Daily News and Daily News on Sunday;
Capital Radio; and that of journalist Andrew Meldrum.
Phulu said the Commission
should maintain firm adherence to its demand for prompt responses
in terms of the rules of procedure by both complainants and states
parties and take appropriate action where this is not done.
He cited the case of
communication 251/02 Lawyers for Human Rights vs Swaziland where
the Commission exercised its power to make a decision when the Swazi
government failed to file its submission on the merits. "This
must be commended and we urge that a similar approach be taken in
similar cases," he said.
He said the final draft
of the revised rules of procedure should provide for speedy hearing
of communications and this could be expedited by allowing for the
composition of a panel of three Commissioners to deal with admissibility
decisions. He said there was also need for the appointment of a
Commissioner to deal with urgent requests for provisional measures
in the inter-session period of the ACHPR.
The process that cases
taken to the ACHPR undergo is three-pronged and begins at the Seizure
stage, which entails presenting the matter before the Commission.
At the seizure process, there is need to prove that the respondent
state is signatory to the African Charter on Human and Peoples'
Rights, and that the state has violated provisions of the Charter.
The second stage is the
Admissibility stage. At this stage the ACHPR declares a case admissible
where the applicant has proved that domestic remedies do not exist,
have been exhausted or are not working. In Zimbabwe's three
cases, all the matters went to the Zimbabwe's highest court,
the Supreme Court, signifying exhaustion of domestic remedies.
The final stage is when
all the involved parties argue the Merits of the matters in question.
Visit
the MISA-Zimbabwe fact
sheet
Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.
TOP
|
