Centre of the Independence of Judges and Lawyers v Algeria (Communication 104 of 1994; Communication 109 of 1994; Communication 126 of 1994)
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 Commission declared the communications inadmissible. The communications failed to meet admissibility requirements because they did not identify specific victims with adequate detail. The report contained general allegations of harassment and persecution of judges and lawyers across multiple countries but lacked specific places, dates, times, and in some cases names of aggrieved parties. The author was not an alleged victim, the communication was not submitted in the name of specific victims, and the information was insufficient to permit Commission action.
Outcome
Communications dismissed as inadmissible for failure to identify specific victims with sufficient detail
Facts
The Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers of Geneva, Switzerland submitted a report to the African Commission describing harassment and persecution of judges and lawyers in 53 countries including 18 African state parties to the African Charter. The report documented incidents including murder, torture, intimidation and threats, and described features of court systems such as military courts and special tribunals. The communication did not specify which facts constituted violations or what remedy was sought. The report contained general allegations without specific places, dates, and times of incidents. In some cases incidents were cited without naming aggrieved parties, with numerous references to anonymous lawyers and judges.
Issues
- Whether the communications satisfied the admissibility requirements under Article 56 of the African Charter and Rule 114(3) of the Commission's Rules of Procedure.
- Whether the communications provided sufficient specificity regarding victims to permit the Commission to intervene or investigate.
Orders
- Communications declared inadmissible.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (2)
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56
- Rules of Procedure of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights Rule 114(3)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.