Wakilii

Fory v Republic of Côte D'ivoire (Application No. 004-2021)

African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights · [2025] AfCHPR 8 · 2025 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 violation of fair trial rights following dismissal of domestic claim
Decision
Application dismissed as inadmissible

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 held that it had jurisdiction to hear the application because it was filed before Côte d'Ivoire's withdrawal of its Article 34(6) declaration took effect. However, the Court declared the application inadmissible for non-exhaustion of local remedies, as the applicant failed to appeal the first instance judgment dismissing his claim to the Abidjan Court of Appeal as required under Ivorian procedural law.

Outcome

Application dismissed as inadmissible

Facts

The applicant, a former revenue collector for Guibéroua Municipality in Côte d'Ivoire, was accused in 1995 of wilfully destroying accounting documents and embezzling public funds following a fire at the Treasury premises. He was relieved of his duties and sentenced to ten years' imprisonment by the Gagnoa Court of First Instance. The applicant alleged that his trade union, SYNATRESOR, failed to provide solidarity and support during these proceedings. On 13 June 2018, he filed a complaint in the Abidjan Court of First Instance against SYNATRESOR seeking 34 billion CFA francs in damages. On 4 June 2020, the Abidjan Plateau Court of First Instance dismissed the complaint in limine litis on the grounds that SYNATRESOR, which was legally established only on 17 March 2004, lacked standing as defendant for events occurring in 1995-1996. The applicant did not appeal this decision to the Abidjan Court of Appeal, instead filing the present application before the African Court on 19 February 2021.

Issues

  1. Whether the African Court has jurisdiction to hear the application given Côte d'Ivoire's withdrawal of its Article 34(6) declaration.
  2. Whether the application is admissible despite the applicant's failure to exhaust local remedies by appealing the first instance judgment.

Orders

  • Judgment rendered by default.
  • Court has jurisdiction.
  • Application declared inadmissible for non-exhaustion of local remedies.
  • Applicant to bear his own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Human Rights — Jurisdiction — Withdrawal of Article 34(6) Declaration — Effect on Pending and New Applications
The withdrawal of a State's declaration under Article 34(6) of the Protocol to the African Charter has no retroactive effect and does not affect cases pending at the time of deposit of the instrument of withdrawal, nor new cases filed before the withdrawal takes effect one year after deposit.
Civil Procedure — Admissibility — Exhaustion of Local Remedies — Requirement to Appeal First Instance Judgment
An applicant must exhaust ordinary judicial remedies, including appeal to a higher court, before bringing an application to the African Court, unless such remedies are unavailable, ineffective, insufficient, or unduly prolonged. A judgment rendered at first instance that is subject to appeal under domestic law must be appealed before local remedies are considered exhausted.
Civil Procedure — Admissibility Requirements — Cumulative Nature
The admissibility requirements under Rule 50(2) of the Rules of the African Court are cumulative. Where one requirement is not satisfied, the Court need not examine the remaining requirements and may declare the application inadmissible.
Civil Procedure — Default Judgment — Conditions for Rendering Judgment by Default
A court may render judgment by default where three conditions are met: notification to the defaulting party of the application and procedural documents; default by one of the parties; and a request made by the other party or by the court acting on its own motion.

Legislation cited (12)

  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 2
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 3
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 7(1)(a)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 26
  • International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 22(3)
  • ILO Convention 87 Article 11
  • Protocol to the African Charter on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 34(6)
  • Protocol to the African Charter on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 3
  • Protocol to the African Charter on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 6(2)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56
  • Ivorian Code of Procedure Article 162(2)
  • Constitutive Act of the African Union Article 3(h)

Cases cited (7)

  • Kouadio Kobena Fory v République de Côte d'Ivoire (Merits and Reparations) (2 December 2021) 5 AfCLR 682
  • Suy Bi Gohoré Émile et autres v République de Côte d'Ivoire (Merits and Reparations) (15 July 2020) 4 AfCLR 406
  • African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights v Republic of Libya (Merits) (3 June 2016) 1 AfCLR 153
  • Ingabire Victoire Umuhoza v Republic of Rwanda (Reparations) (7 December 2018) 2 AfCLR 202
  • Fidèle Mulindahabi v Republic of Rwanda (Jurisdiction and Admissibility) (4 July 2019) 3 AfCLR 389
  • Alex Thomas v United Republic of Tanzania (Merits) (20 November 2015) 1 AfCLR 465
  • Kouassi Kouame Patrice and Baba Sylla v République de Côte d'Ivoire (Application No. 015/2021)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Fory v Republic of Côte D'ivoire (Application No. 004-2021) [2025] AfCHPR 8 (5 February 2025)
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.