B v Kenya (Communication 283 of 2003)

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.

Holding

The African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights closed the file following the Complainant's withdrawal of the communication. The Complainant withdrew after receiving information that the judiciary was investigating the leak of judges' names and that fair trial concerns were being raised before the tribunals and could reach Kenya's constitutional court. The Respondent State had argued the communication was inadmissible for failure to exhaust local remedies and reliance on newspaper reports.

Outcome

Communication withdrawn by Complainant; file closed by African Commission

Facts

On 30 September 2003, the Anti-Corruption Committee presented the Ringera Report to Kenya's Chief Justice, alleging endemic corruption in the judiciary and naming implicated judges. On 4 October 2003, the Chief Justice gave unnamed judges a two-week ultimatum to resign or face trial. On 14 October 2003, the President appointed tribunals to investigate 23 judges, whose names and suspension were announced via television broadcast. The Complainant alleged this was the first time the judges learned of their inclusion on the list. The announcement did not detail the specific allegations against each judge. Some judges resigned or retired. The Complainant submitted a communication to the African Commission alleging violations of Articles 7 and 26 of the African Charter, claiming the judges were not informed of allegations or given opportunity to respond. The Respondent State argued the communication was inadmissible for failure to exhaust local remedies and reliance on newspaper reports. Tribunals began sitting in February 2004. The Complainant subsequently withdrew the communication, stating the judiciary was investigating the leak and fair trial issues were being addressed domestically.

Issues

1. Whether the communication met the admissibility requirements under Article 56 of the African Charter.
2. Whether the process of investigating and suspending judges named in the Ringera Report violated their rights under Articles 7 and 26 of the African Charter.
3. Whether local remedies were exhausted before submitting the communication to the African Commission.
4. Whether the withdrawal of the communication by the Complainant should result in closure of the file.

Orders

• Communication withdrawn by Complainant.
• File closed by the African Commission.

Legislation cited (8)

• African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 7
• African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 26
• African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56(2)
• African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56(4)
• African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56(5)
• Rules of Procedure of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 111
• Public Officer Ethics Act 2003
• Anti Corruption and Economic Crimes Act 2003

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