Abess v Republic of Tunisia (Application No. 026-2018)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
The African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights struck out the application from its cause list on the ground that the Applicant failed to pursue his case with due diligence. Despite multiple requests and extensions of time granted by the Registry to file supporting documents and a reply to the Respondent State's response, the Applicant repeatedly failed to comply without justification. The Court found this constituted a failure to pursue the case within the meaning of Rule 65(1)(b) of the Rules of Court.
Outcome
Application struck out without prejudice to the Applicant's right to file a new application in accordance with Rule 65(3) of the Rules
Facts
Mohamed Ali Abess, a Tunisian advocate, submitted his candidacy for the 2014 Tunisian presidential election. On 29 September 2014, the Independent High Authority for Elections rejected his candidacy on the ground that it failed to garner the required number of endorsements under Tunisian law. The Applicant also filed four cases before domestic courts in Tunisia which allegedly remained unsettled. He brought an application to the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights alleging multiple violations of his rights under the African Charter and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Registry repeatedly requested the Applicant to submit supporting documents, including copies of domestic court judgments, and to file a reply to the Respondent State's response. Despite multiple reminders and extensions of time between October 2018 and November 2020, the Applicant failed to comply with any of the Court's requests.
Issues
- Whether the Applicant failed to pursue his case within the time limit provided by the Court.
- Whether the Application should be struck out from the Court's cause list under Rule 65(1)(b) of the Rules of Court.
Orders
- Application struck out from the Court's Cause List.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (10)
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 2
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 3
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 7
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 13
- Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 18
- Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 22
- Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 34(6)
- International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 14
- International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 25
- Tunisian Organic Law on Elections and Referendums No. 16 of 26 May 2014
Cases cited (2)
- Abdallah Ally Kulukuni v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 007/2018)
- Magweiga Mahiri v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 029/2017)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.