Wakilii

Ajavon v Republic of Benin (Application No. 062-2019)

African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights · Ajavon v Republic of Benin (Application No. 062-2019) [2020] AfCHPR 49 (17 April 2020) · 2020 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for provisional measures before the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights
Decision
Provisional measures granted in part — elections suspended pending merits determination; request to suspend laws dismissed

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 held that it has prima facie jurisdiction and ordered the Republic of Benin to suspend the municipal and council elections scheduled for 17 May 2020 pending a decision on the merits. The Court found that the non-execution of its earlier judgment of 29 March 2019 created a real risk of irreparable harm to the applicant's right to participate in elections, as his criminal record still featured a twenty-year conviction that prevented him from submitting his candidacy. The Court dismissed the request to suspend the application of various Benin laws, holding that such a measure would require in-depth examination appropriate only at the merits stage.

Outcome

Provisional measures granted in part — elections suspended pending merits determination; request to suspend laws dismissed

Facts

Sebastien Germain Marie Aïkoue Ajavon, a Benin national residing in Paris as a political refugee, sought provisional measures from the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights. He alleged that despite the Court's earlier ruling of 7 December 2018 ordering suspension of his conviction and its judgment of 29 March 2019 ordering annulment of that conviction, his criminal record still featured a twenty-year conviction by the Special Court for the Repression of Terrorism and Economic Crimes (CRIET). This conviction prevented his political party, Union Sociale Libérale, from obtaining a certificate of compliance and participating in the legislative elections of 28 April 2019. The applicant contended that without participating in the municipal and council elections scheduled for 17 May 2020, he would be unable to meet the sponsorship requirements under Benin's amended Constitution to run in the 2021 presidential elections, as candidates required sponsorship by at least 16 members of Parliament and local elected officials. The Republic of Benin had not executed the Court's earlier judgments.

Issues

  1. Whether the Court has prima facie jurisdiction to hear the application for provisional measures.
  2. Whether the application for provisional measures is admissible.
  3. Whether there exists extreme gravity and urgency justifying the grant of provisional measures.
  4. Whether the applicant faces a risk of irreparable harm if the municipal and council elections of 17 May 2020 proceed.
  5. Whether the laws passed by the Benin National Assembly should be suspended pending determination of the main application.

Orders

  • Dismisses the preliminary objection based on jurisdiction.
  • Finds that it has prima facie jurisdiction.
  • Dismisses the objection based on admissibility.
  • Orders the Respondent State to suspend the municipal and council elections of 17 May 2020 pending its decision on the merits.
  • Dismisses the request to suspend the application of Organic Law No. 2018-02 of 4 January 2018, Law No. 2017-20 of 20 April 2018 on the Digital Code, Law No. 2018-34 of 5 October 2018 on the Right to Strike, Law No. 2018-016 on the Penal Code, Law No. 2019-40 of 7 November 2019 on the Constitution Amendment, and municipal orders prohibiting public demonstrations.
  • Orders the Respondent State to submit a report on measures taken to implement this Ruling within thirty (30) days of its notification.

Rules and key headnotes

Provisional Measures — Jurisdiction — Prima Facie Jurisdiction
When considering an application for provisional measures, the Court is not required to satisfy itself that it has jurisdiction on the merits, but simply that it has prima facie jurisdiction. The Court has prima facie jurisdiction where the respondent State is a party to the Charter and other international instruments violation of which is alleged.
Provisional Measures — Admissibility — Procedural Requirements
In relation to provisional measures, neither the Charter nor the Protocol spells out admissibility requirements, as the consideration of provisional measures is subject only to prior determination of prima facie jurisdiction. Provisions enabling the Court to grant or dismiss provisional measures are not admissibility requirements but substantive criteria for the exercise of the Court's discretion.
Provisional Measures — Criteria — Extreme Gravity and Urgency
The Court may order provisional measures pendente lite only if the basic requirements are met, namely extreme gravity or urgency and the prevention of irreparable harm to persons. Urgency means a real and imminent likelihood that irreparable harm will be caused before the Court renders its final decision. The risk must be real, which excludes a purely hypothetical risk.
Provisional Measures — Non-Execution of Judgments — Irreparable Harm
Where a State fails to execute the Court's judgment ordering annulment of a criminal conviction, and that conviction on the applicant's criminal record prevents the applicant from submitting candidacy for elections, the risk of the applicant not being able to run in scheduled elections is real and the irreparable character of the resulting harm is indisputable, justifying suspension of the elections pending a decision on the merits.
Provisional Measures — Suspension of Legislation — Scope of Relief
A request to suspend the application of multiple laws requires an in-depth examination of the said laws, which can be done only when considering the application on the merits, not in provisional measures proceedings. Such a measure will be dismissed at the provisional measures stage.

Legislation cited (14)

  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Articles 3, 4, 5, 6, 7(1)(c), 10, 11, 13, 15, 26
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 3(1)
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 27(2)
  • 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)
  • African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance Articles 2(2), 3(2), 4(1), 10(2), 23(5), 32(8)
  • International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 25
  • International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Article 22
  • ECOWAS Protocol A/SP1/12/01 Article 2(1)
  • Organic Law No. 2018-02 of 4 January 2018 (Benin)
  • Law No. 2017-20 of 20 April 2018 (Benin Digital Code)
  • Law No. 2018-34 of 5 October 2018 (Benin Right to Strike)
  • Law No. 2018-016 (Benin Penal Code)
  • Law No. 2019-40 of 7 November 2019 Article 44 (Benin Constitution Amendment)
  • Law No. 2018-31 of 9 October 2018 (Benin Electoral Code)

Cases cited (4)

  • Gambia v Myanmar (ICJ 23 January 2020)
  • Iran v United States of America (ICJ 3 October 2018)
  • Equatorial Guinea v France (ICJ 7 December 2016)
  • Cuya Levy v Peru (IACtHR 12 March 2020)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Ajavon v Republic of Benin (Application No. 062-2019) [2020] AfCHPR 49 (17 April 2020)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.