Wakilii

European Alliance For Human Rights and Others v Egypt (Communication 544 of 2015)

African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights · [2018] ACHPR 124 · 2018 Communication Struck Out AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Communication to African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights alleging violations of the African Charter
Decision
Communication struck out for failure to comply with procedural requirements

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 struck out the communication for lack of diligent prosecution after the complainant failed to submit arguments on admissibility within the stipulated two-month deadline and showed no interest in prosecuting the matter despite multiple notifications.

Outcome

Communication struck out for failure to comply with procedural requirements

Facts

The complainants alleged that following a military coup in Egypt in July 2013, widespread human rights violations occurred including extra-judicial killings, torture, enforced disappearances, unlawful arrests, and violations of academic freedom. They submitted that up to March 2014, 1347 students were captured and 176 killed, and that 7 university professors died outside the law, 160 were imprisoned, and 25 were pursued by security authorities. The communication was filed with the African Commission on 12 January 2015. The Commission was seized of the matter during its 18th Extra-Ordinary Session from 29 July to 07 August 2015. By letter dated 29 September 2015, the complainant was requested to present evidence and arguments on admissibility within two months. The deadline expired on 29 November 2015. The complainant failed to submit any arguments on admissibility and was informed on multiple occasions that the deadline had expired and no further submissions would be accepted.

Issues

  1. Whether the complainant demonstrated diligent prosecution of the communication by complying with procedural deadlines for submissions on admissibility.

Orders

  • Communication struck out for lack of diligent prosecution.

Rules and key headnotes

Administrative Law — Regional Tribunals — Procedural Requirements — Failure to Comply with Deadlines
Where a party fails to submit required arguments on admissibility within the stipulated deadline set by the Commission's Rules of Procedure and shows no interest in prosecuting the matter despite multiple notifications, the Commission may strike out the communication for lack of diligent prosecution.

Legislation cited (1)

  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Articles 1, 2, 3, 60, 61

Cases cited (4)

  • Mohammed Ramadan Mahmoud Fayad Allah v Arab Republic of Egypt (Communication 594 of 2015)
  • Ahmed Mohammed Ali Subaie v Arab Republic of Egypt (Communication 612 of 2016)
  • Communication 412/121 Journal Echos du Nord v. Gabon
  • Kofi Yamagnane v Republic of Togo (Communication 387 of 2010)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

European Alliance For Human Rights and Others v Egypt (Communication 544 of 2015) [2018] ACHPR 124 (18 October 2018)
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.