Hossou and Another v Republic of Benin
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 over the Application, as the withdrawal of Benin's Declaration under Article 34(6) has no retroactive effect on cases under consideration at the time of withdrawal. The Court dismissed the Respondent State's objection based on lack of signatures, adopting a flexible approach where the applicants' identities were established through email endorsement and maintained contact. The Court dismissed the request for provisional measures on the grounds that it touched on the merits of the main Application and the applicants failed to demonstrate extreme gravity, urgency, or risk of irreparable harm as required under Article 27(2) of the Protocol.
Outcome
Application for provisional measures dismissed; main Application to proceed
Facts
On 8 February 2016, the Republic of Benin deposited a Declaration under Article 34(6) of the Protocol to the African Charter, accepting the African Court's jurisdiction to receive applications from individuals and NGOs. On 25 March 2020, Benin deposited an instrument withdrawing that Declaration. Glory Cyriaque Hossou and Angelo Adelakoun, both Beninese lawyers, filed an Application on 7 May 2020 challenging the withdrawal as a violation of the African Charter and international human rights standards. They argued that the withdrawal deprived citizens of access to regional judicial mechanisms and constituted a regression of rights. The applicants requested provisional measures to revoke Benin's withdrawal decision pending determination of the main Application. The Application was filed via email without physical signatures, though the applicants endorsed their names and provided full contact details. Benin objected to admissibility on grounds of the missing signatures and argued that the withdrawal issue had already been addressed in prior jurisprudence establishing that withdrawal takes effect 12 months after deposit of the instrument.
Issues
- Whether the Court has prima facie jurisdiction to entertain the Application.
- Whether the request for provisional measures is admissible despite the absence of physical signatures on the Application.
- Whether the circumstances warrant the grant of provisional measures to revoke Benin's withdrawal of its Declaration under Article 34(6) of the Protocol.
Orders
- Respondent State's objection to the admissibility of the Application dismissed.
- Applicants' request for provisional measures dismissed.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (7)
- Protocol to the African Charter on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 3(1)
- Protocol to the African Charter on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 27(2)
- 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 5(3)
- Rules of Court Rule 34(1)
- Rules of Court Rule 39(1)
- Rules of Court Rule 51(1)
Cases cited (7)
- Komi Koutche v Republic of Benin (Application No. 020/2019)
- Amini Juma v United Republic of Tanzania (3 June 2016) 1 AfCLR 658
- African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights v Libya (15 March 2013) 1 AfCLR 193
- Ingabire Victoire Umuhoza v Rwanda (3 June 2016) 1 AfCLR 562
- Hongue Eric Noudehouenou v Republic of Benin (Application No. 003/2020)
- Robert John Penessis v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 012/2015)
- Armand Guéhi v United Republic of Tanzania (18 March 2016) 1 AfCLR 587
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.