Wakilii

Hassani v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 029-2015)

African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights · [2021] AfCHPR 19 · 2021 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 challenging conviction and sentence for armed robbery following exhaustion of domestic appeals in Tanzania
Decision
Application dismissed as inadmissible for failure to file within a reasonable time

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 examine applications alleging violations of the African Charter and other human rights instruments ratified by Tanzania, including allegations not raised in domestic proceedings. However, the Court found the Application inadmissible because it was not filed within a reasonable time. The Applicant filed his Application five years, eight months, and thirteen days after the Respondent State deposited its Declaration accepting the Court's jurisdiction, without justifying the delay or providing evidence of a pending review application he claimed to have filed.

Outcome

Application dismissed as inadmissible for failure to file within a reasonable time

Facts

Yusuph Hassani, a Tanzanian national, was convicted of armed robbery on 31 August 2006 by the District Court of Muheza and sentenced to thirty years imprisonment. His first appeal to the Resident Magistrate's Court (with Extended Jurisdiction) was dismissed on 29 May 2008. His second appeal to the Court of Appeal of Tanzania was dismissed on 9 March 2010. Tanzania deposited its Declaration accepting the African Court's jurisdiction to receive individual applications on 29 March 2010. Hassani filed his Application before the African Court on 23 November 2015, five years and eight months after Tanzania's Declaration. He claimed to have filed a review application before the Court of Appeal on 5 April 2010, but provided no evidence of this despite repeated requests from the Court.

Issues

  1. Whether the Court has material jurisdiction to hear the Application where the Applicant alleges violations that were not raised before domestic courts.
  2. Whether the Court has jurisdiction to examine proceedings before the Court of Appeal of Tanzania.
  3. Whether the Applicant exhausted local remedies before filing the Application.
  4. Whether the Application was filed within a reasonable time after exhaustion of local remedies.

Orders

  • Objections to jurisdiction dismissed.
  • Court declared it has jurisdiction.
  • Objection to admissibility based on non-exhaustion of local remedies dismissed.
  • Application found not filed within a reasonable time within the meaning of Article 56(6) of the Charter and Rule 50(2)(f) of the Rules.
  • Application declared inadmissible.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Human Rights — African Court Jurisdiction — Material Jurisdiction — Competence to Examine Allegations Not Raised in Domestic Proceedings
The African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights has material jurisdiction to examine any application alleging violations of rights protected by the African Charter or other human rights instruments ratified by the respondent state, regardless of whether those allegations were raised before domestic courts.
Human Rights — African Court Jurisdiction — Competence to Review Appellate Proceedings — Not Acting as Court of Appeal
The African Court's competence to examine national court proceedings to determine compliance with Charter standards extends to both trial and appellate levels and is not constrained by the grounds of appeal raised or not raised by an applicant in domestic proceedings. The Court does not thereby act as a court of appeal.
Human Rights — Admissibility — Exhaustion of Local Remedies — Constitutional Petition as Extraordinary Remedy
A constitutional petition within Tanzania's judicial system is an extraordinary remedy which applicants are not required to exhaust before filing applications before the African Court. Where criminal proceedings have been determined by the highest appellate court, the state is deemed to have had the opportunity to redress alleged violations.
Human Rights — Admissibility — Reasonable Time — Assessment Factors
The reasonableness of the time frame for filing an application before the African Court depends on the specific circumstances of the case and must be determined case-by-case. Relevant factors include the applicant's personal circumstances (whether lay, indigent, or incarcerated) and whether the applicant pursued review proceedings before domestic courts. However, an applicant must demonstrate how their personal situation inhibited prompt filing.
Human Rights — Admissibility — Reasonable Time — Burden of Proof
Where an applicant claims to have filed a review application before domestic courts to justify delay in filing before the African Court, the applicant must provide evidence of such filing. Failure to provide evidence or justify its absence means this factor cannot be considered in assessing reasonableness of time. A delay of five years, eight months, and thirteen days without justification is not reasonable.

Legislation cited (18)

  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 3(1)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 6(2)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 7
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 7(1)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 7(1)(c)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 7(1)(d)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 34(6)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56(5)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56(6)
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 3
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 22
  • Constitution of Tanzania Section 13
  • Criminal Procedure Act of Tanzania Section 32(1)
  • Criminal Procedure Act of Tanzania Section 32(2)
  • Criminal Procedure Act of Tanzania Section 33
  • Criminal Procedure Act of Tanzania Section 310
  • Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act

Cases cited (25)

  • Andrew Ambrose Cheusi v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 004/2015)
  • Alex Thomas v United Republic of Tanzania (20 November 2015)
  • Kennedy Owino Onyachi and Another v United Republic of Tanzania (28 September 2017)
  • Jibu Amir alias Mussa and another v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 014/2015)
  • Masoud Rajabu v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 008/2016)
  • Anudo Ochieng Anudo v United Republic of Tanzania (22 March 2018)
  • Ernest Francis Mtingwi v Malawi (15 March 2013)
  • Kenedy Ivan v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 025/2016)
  • Armand Guehi v United Republic of Tanzania (7 December 2018)
  • Nguza Viking (Babu Seya) and Johnson Nguza (Papi Kocha) v United Republic of Tanzania (23 March 2018)
  • Ingabire Victoire Umuhoza v Republic of Rwanda (3 June 2016)
  • Beneficiaries of late Norbert Zongo and Others v Burkina Faso (21 June 2013)
  • Kenyan Section of International Commission of Jurists, Law Society and Others v. Kenya, ACHPR, Communication No. 263/02 (2004) AHRLR 71
  • African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights v Republic of Kenya (26 May 2017)
  • Mohamed Abubakari v United Republic of Tanzania (3 June 2016)
  • Michael Majuru v. Zimbabwe, ACHPR, Communication No. 308/2005 ACHPR Annual Activity Report Annex (May- Nov 2008)
  • Christopher Jonas v United Republic of Tanzania (28 September 2017)
  • Amiri Ramadhani v United Republic of Tanzania (2018)
  • Werema Wangoko v United Republic of Tanzania (7 December 2018)
  • Hamad Mohamed Lyambaka v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 010/2016)
  • Godfred Anthony and another v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 015/2015)
  • Livinus Daudi Manyuka v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 020/2015)
  • Kalebi Elisamehe v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 028/2015)
  • Jean Claude Roger Gombert v Côte d'Ivoire (22 March 2018)
  • Dexter Eddie Johnson v Republic of Ghana (Application No. 016/2017)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Hassani v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 029-2015) [2021] AfCHPR 19 (30 September 2021)
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.