Wakilii

Haidara and Others v Republic of Mali (Ruling) (Application No. 009-2024)

African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights · [2024] AfCHPR 35 · 2024 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for provisional measures before the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights
Decision
Provisional measures granted — detention warrants suspended pending completion of medical treatment and determination of the merits

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 prima facie jurisdiction to order provisional measures. The Court found that the conditions of extreme gravity, urgency, and risk of irreparable harm were met based on medical evidence showing the Applicants' precarious health following alleged torture during detention. The Court ordered Mali to suspend the detention warrants to enable the Applicants to access specialised medical treatment pending determination of the merits.

Outcome

Provisional measures granted — detention warrants suspended pending completion of medical treatment and determination of the merits

Facts

The three Applicants, all Malian nationals and members of a political party, were arrested on 12 June 2023 and detained at the National Bureau of State Security (ANSE) for four months. They allege torture during this detention, including flogging, scarification, and electrocution. On 10 October 2023, an investigating magistrate charged them with criminal conspiracy, breach of state security, and other offences, and remanded them in custody. Their requests for release were dismissed by the investigating magistrate and the Court of Appeal. Medical certificates from the prison doctor confirmed their precarious health and the prison's inability to provide adequate treatment. The Applicants filed this application seeking provisional measures to suspend their detention to access specialised medical care.

Issues

  1. Whether the Court has prima facie jurisdiction to order provisional measures in this matter.
  2. Whether the conditions of extreme gravity and urgency are met to warrant the grant of provisional measures.
  3. Whether there is a risk of irreparable harm to the Applicants if provisional measures are not granted.

Orders

  • The Respondent State shall take all necessary measures to suspend the detention of the Applicants to enable them access medical attention, till the completion of their treatment.
  • The Respondent State shall report on measures taken to implement this Ruling within fifteen (15) days from the date of notification.

Rules and key headnotes

Human Rights — Provisional Measures — Prima Facie Jurisdiction
For the purposes of ordering provisional measures, the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights does not need to establish that it has jurisdiction to hear the merits of the case, but only that it has prima facie jurisdiction.
Human Rights — Provisional Measures — Conditions for Grant
Provisional measures under Article 27(2) of the Protocol to the African Charter may be granted only in cases of extreme gravity and urgency and when necessary to avoid irreparable harm to persons. These conditions are cumulative, and if one is not met, provisional measures cannot be granted.
Human Rights — Provisional Measures — Urgency and Extreme Gravity
Urgency, which is consubstantial with extreme gravity, means a real and imminent probability that irreparable harm will occur before the Court's final decision. The risk must be real, not hypothetical, and must require immediate action.
Human Rights — Provisional Measures — Irreparable Harm — Medical Evidence
Where applicants allege torture during detention and provide medical certificates confirming their precarious health and the inability of prison medical services to provide adequate treatment, the risk of irreparable harm is established and warrants the grant of provisional measures to suspend detention for access to specialised medical care.

Cases cited (7)

  • Adama Diarra alias Vieux Blen v Republic of Mali (Provisional Measures) (Application No. 005/2020)
  • Harouna Dicko and 4 Others v Burkina Faso (Provisional Measures)
  • Guillaume Kigbafori Soro and others v Republic of Côte d'Ivoire (Provisional Measures)
  • Babarou Bocoum v Republic of Mali (Provisional Measures)
  • Moadh Kheriji Ghannouchi and others v Republic of Tunisia (Application No. 004/2023)
  • Adélakoun and others v Republic of Benin (Provisional Measures)
  • Sébastien Germain Marie Aîkoue Ajavon v Republic of Benin (Provisional Measures)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Haidara and Others v Republic of Mali (Ruling) (Application No. 009-2024) [2024] AfCHPR 35 (29 October 2024)
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.