Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Uwazi is developed by
African Court Jurisprudence
Library
Login

Info
5Relationships

Transfers to the Commission

Commentary

Search Tips

Search text

Type something in the search box to get some results.

No Table of Contents

Table of Contents allows users to navigate easier throught the document.

Transfers to the Commission

Commentary

Commentary type: Procedure

Procedure: Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction: Contentious cases

Commentary: The Court, when deciding on admissibility, may exercise its discretion under article 6(3) of the Protocol to transfer a case to the Commission if the circumstances of the case so requires – taking cognisance of the nature of the allegations made in the application. (Daniel Amare and Mulugeta Amare v Republic of Mozambique & Mozambique Airlines, application 005/2011, decision, 16 June 2011, para 9; Ekollo Moundi Alexandre v Nigeria and Cameroon, application 008/2011, decision 23 September 2011, para 11; Soufiane Ababou v Algeria, application 002/2011, decision, 16 June 2011; Association Juristes d’Afrique pour la Bonne Gouvernance v Côte d’Ivoire, application 006/2011, decision, 16 June 2011, para 10). In a dissenting opinion, Judge Ouguergouz referred to the need for criteria to determine when cases should be transferred to the Commission (Ekollo Moundi Alexandre v Nigeria and Cameroon, application 008/2011, decision 23 September 2011, Dissenting Opinion of Judge Ouguergouz.

Date modified: Aug 23, 2017

Primary Documents

Transfers to the Commission.pdf
french
Download View

005/2011 Daniel Amare and Mulugeta Amare v. Mozambique and Mozambique Airlines

9. Article 6 (3) of the Protocol provides that the Court may consider cases or transfer them to the AfricanCommission on Human and Peoples' Rights. The Court observes that in the light of the allegations made inthe application, this would be an appropriate matter to transfer to the Commission.

Contentious cases

008/2011 Ekollo Moundi Alexandre v Nigeria and Cameroon (Dissenting Opinion - Fatsah Ouguergouz)

11. The practice of such a transfer was established by the Court in its decision regarding its jurisdiction inrespect of the abovementioned Application N° 002/2011. The Court upheld the practice when, at the samesession, it dealt with Applications N° 005/2011 ( Daniel Amare & Mulugeta Amare vs Mozambique Airlines& Mozambique) and N° 006/2011 ( Association des Juristes d'Afrique pour la bonne gouvernance vs Côted'Ivoire), and also declared that it manifestly lacks jurisdiction to consider such applications.

Contentious cases

002/2011 Soufiane Ababou v Algeria (decision)

Contentious cases

006/2011 Association Juristes d’Afrique pour la Bonne Gouvernance v Côte d’Ivoire

1 0. Article 6 (3) of the Protocol provides that "The Court may consider cases or transfer them to the Commission". The Court notes that in view of the allegations raised in the application, it would be appropriate to transfer the case to the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights.

Contentious cases

008/2011 Ekollo Moundi Alexandre v Nigeria and Cameroon (Dissenting Opinion - Fatsah Ouguergouz)

Contentious cases

Contentious case5
- Contentious cases5

Create Reference

Select relationship type

Contentious case
Commentary
Advisory opinion
Instrument
Country
Case type
Application nr
Court
Decision date
Commentary type
Admissibility
Reparations
Jurisdiction
Substance
Procedure

Search Tips

View

Add entities / documents

Search Tips