Wakilii

Collectif des Anciens Travailleurs du Laboratoire ALS v Republic of Mali (Application No. 042-2016)

African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights · [2019] AfCHPR 8 · 2019 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights alleging violations of the right to health and fair trial arising from alleged lead poisoning of former laboratory workers
Decision
Application declared inadmissible for failure to exhaust local remedies

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 jurisdiction to hear applications from informal groups of individuals where the respondent state has deposited the Article 34(6) declaration. However, the application was declared inadmissible for failure to exhaust local remedies, as the applicants could have seized the investigating judge under Mali's Code of Criminal Procedure to address the alleged delay in the Attorney General's handling of their criminal complaint.

Outcome

Application declared inadmissible for failure to exhaust local remedies

Facts

One hundred and thirteen former workers of Australian Laboratory Services (ALS) in Mali alleged they suffered lead poisoning from exposure to toxic chemicals during their employment. On 1 February 2012, they filed a criminal complaint with the Prosecutor at the Commune III Court of First Instance in Bamako. After receiving no response for over a year, they wrote to the Attorney General at the Court of Appeal of Bamako on 17 May 2013. By 1 July 2016, when they filed their application to the African Court, their criminal complaint had still not resulted in any decision. They claimed violations of their rights to health and fair trial under the African Charter and international human rights covenants.

Issues

  1. Whether the Court has personal jurisdiction to hear an application filed by an informal group of individuals.
  2. Whether the applicants properly disclosed their identities for purposes of admissibility.
  3. Whether the applicants exhausted local remedies before filing the application, or whether the domestic proceedings were unduly prolonged.

Orders

  • Objection regarding lack of legal capacity of the applicants dismissed.
  • Court declared that it has jurisdiction.
  • Respondent State's objection that the application is inadmissible for failure to exhaust local remedies upheld.
  • Application declared inadmissible.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Human Rights — Access to Regional Courts — Standing of Informal Groups
An informal group of individuals has standing to file an application before the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights where the respondent state has deposited the declaration under Article 34(6) of the Protocol accepting the Court's jurisdiction to receive applications from individuals.
Civil Procedure — Admissibility — Disclosure of Identity
The requirement to disclose the identity of applicants under Rule 40(1) of the Rules of the African Court is satisfied when a list of the names of all members of an applicant group is submitted to the Court.
Civil Procedure — Exhaustion of Local Remedies — Available Remedies
Where a criminal complaint filed with a prosecutor has not resulted in a decision within a reasonable time, the complainant must pursue available remedies such as filing a civil suit before the investigating judge under the domestic procedural code before claiming that local remedies have been exhausted or unduly prolonged.
Civil Procedure — Exhaustion of Local Remedies — Undue Prolongation
The exception to the exhaustion of local remedies requirement based on undue prolongation of proceedings does not apply where the applicant has failed to pursue an effective and available remedy that could have addressed the alleged delay.

Legislation cited (15)

  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 16
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 24
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 7(1)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 26
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56
  • International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Article 12
  • International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 2(3)
  • International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 14
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People's Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 3
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People's Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 5(3)
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People's Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 6(2)
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People's Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 34(6)
  • Mali Code of Criminal Procedure Article 62
  • Mali Code of Criminal Procedure Article 90
  • Mali Code of Criminal Procedure Article 112

Cases cited (6)

  • Askoy v Turkey (Application No. 21987/93)
  • ZT v Norway (Application No. 2238/2003)
  • Rosendo Radilla Pacheco (Application No. 777/01)
  • Diakité Couple v Republic of Mali (Application No. 009/2016)
  • Mariam Kouma and Ousmane Diabaté v Republic of Mali (Application No. 024/2016)
  • Rutabingwa Chrysanthe v Republic of Rwanda (Application No. 022/2015)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Collectif des Anciens Travailleurs du Laboratoire ALS v Republic of Mali (Application No. 042-2016) [2019] AfCHPR 8 (28 March 2019)
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.