Wakilii

Ibrahim Almaz Deng & 6 Others (Represented by the Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa) v Republic of the Sudan (Communication 470-14)

African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights · [2022] ACHPR 9 · 2022 Communication Upheld — Violations Found AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Communication to the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights alleging violations of the African Charter arising from arrest, detention, torture, and death sentences imposed following trials under Sudan's Anti-Terrorism Act
Decision
Communication upheld. Violations of Articles 1, 4, 5 and 7 of the African Charter found. Respondent State ordered to compensate victims, investigate torture allegations, reform Anti-Terrorism Act, and implement safeguards against torture.

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 held that Sudan violated Articles 1, 4, 5, and 7 of the African Charter. The death sentences imposed following trials that violated fair trial guarantees constituted an unlawful threat to life. The applicants were subjected to torture including severe beatings, electric shocks, sleep deprivation, solitary confinement, and denial of medical care. The trials violated fair trial rights through denial of adequate access to counsel, use of torture-induced confessions as evidence, undue delay in bringing detainees before a court, and failure to afford genuine appellate review. Sudan failed to investigate torture allegations.

Outcome

Communication upheld. Violations of Articles 1, 4, 5 and 7 of the African Charter found. Respondent State ordered to compensate victims, investigate torture allegations, reform Anti-Terrorism Act, and implement safeguards against torture.

Facts

Seven individuals, members of or in custody of the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) in Darfur, were arrested by Sudan Armed Forces in 2011. Prisoners 1 to 6 were arrested on 11 January 2011; Prisoner 7 on 11 July 2011. All were held incommunicado for extended periods, tortured by Military Intelligence to extract confessions, and denied access to lawyers and medical care. Torture methods included severe beatings with whips and sticks, electric shocks, sleep deprivation, solitary confinement, racial insults, and application of force to sexual organs. Prisoners 1 to 6 first appeared in court nine months after arrest; Prisoner 7 after six weeks. All were tried before Anti-Terrorism Courts under the Anti-Terrorism Act 2001, convicted on terrorism charges, and sentenced to death. Defense lawyers had minimal access to clients, limited time to prepare, and were excluded from proceedings. Appeals were dismissed without proper hearing. The Constitutional Court stayed executions pending its decision. The prisoners were subsequently released by presidential pardon.

Issues

  1. Whether the death sentences imposed on the applicants following trials under Sudan's Anti-Terrorism Act violated their right to life under Article 4 of the African Charter.
  2. Whether the applicants were subjected to torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in violation of Article 5 of the African Charter.
  3. Whether the applicants' trials before the Anti-Terrorism Courts violated their right to a fair trial under Article 7 of the African Charter.
  4. Whether confessions obtained through torture and admitted as evidence violated the applicants' fair trial rights.
  5. Whether the Respondent State failed to investigate allegations of torture in violation of Article 5 read with Article 1 of the African Charter.
  6. Whether the conflict in Darfur constituted a non-international armed conflict such that international humanitarian law applied to the treatment of the detainees.

Orders

  • The Respondent State is in violation of Articles 1, 4, 5 and 7(1)(a), (c) and (d) of the African Charter.
  • The Respondent State shall reform its Anti-Terrorism Act (2001), policies and practices incompatible with the African Charter and other regional and international human rights and IHL legal instruments.
  • The Respondent State shall compensate and rehabilitate prisoners 1 to 7 for prejudices suffered.
  • The Respondent State shall conduct prompt and impartial investigations into the allegations of torture and ill treatment and bring perpetrators to justice.
  • The authorities responsible shall apologize to prisoners 1 to 7 as acknowledgement of violation of their rights and ensure non-repetition.
  • The Respondent State shall train security officers on relevant standards concerning adherence to custodial safeguards and the prohibition of torture.
  • The Respondent State shall adopt and implement procedural safeguards for the prevention of torture as required under the Robben Island Guidelines.
  • The Respondent State shall inform the Commission within 180 days of measures taken to implement this decision.

Rules and key headnotes

Right to Life — Death Penalty — Fair Trial Prerequisite
Where a death sentence is imposed following a trial that violates fair trial guarantees under Article 7 of the African Charter, the sentence constitutes an unlawful threat to life and violates Article 4 even if the sentence is not ultimately executed.
International Humanitarian Law — Non-International Armed Conflict — Applicability
A conflict between state armed forces and an organized armed group exercising territorial control and engaged in protracted hostilities constitutes a non-international armed conflict governed by Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol II, and the African Commission may apply IHL standards by reference to Articles 60 and 61 of the African Charter to assess violations of Charter rights.
Torture — Definition and Threshold — State Responsibility
Acts constituting torture under Article 5 of the African Charter include severe beatings, electric shocks, sleep deprivation, prolonged solitary confinement, denial of medical care, and application of force to sexual organs, when inflicted by state agents to extract confessions or punish, and causing severe physical and mental suffering.
Torture — Proof of Injuries — Absence of Medical Evidence
Where detainees are held incommunicado and denied access to medical care, the absence of medical evidence does not preclude a finding of torture; the Commission may rely on witness testimony and circumstantial evidence including visible injuries observed by relatives and lawyers.
Torture — State Duty to Investigate
Article 5 read with Article 1 of the African Charter imposes an obligation on states to promptly, impartially and effectively investigate all allegations of torture by state officials and to prosecute and punish perpetrators; failure to investigate known allegations constitutes a violation of Article 5.
Fair Trial — Right to Counsel — Adequate Access and Preparation Time
The right to counsel under Article 7(1)(c) of the African Charter requires that accused persons have prompt access to lawyers from the time of arrest, adequate time and facilities to consult confidentially and prepare a defense, and that trials not proceed in the absence of defense counsel where the accused faces serious charges including the death penalty.
Confessions — Torture-Induced Statements — Inadmissibility
Confessions obtained through torture are inadmissible as evidence in criminal proceedings under Article 7 of the African Charter and international humanitarian law; the use of such confessions to secure convictions violates the right to a fair trial regardless of the probative value of the evidence.

Legislation cited (20)

  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 1
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 4
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 5
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 6
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 7
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 60
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 61
  • Geneva Conventions Common Article 3
  • Additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions Article 4
  • Additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions Article 6
  • International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 7
  • International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 14
  • Convention against Torture Article 1
  • Sudan Anti-Terrorism Act 2001
  • Sudan Criminal Procedure Act 1991 s.79(3)
  • Sudan Criminal Procedure Act 1991 s.208
  • Sudan Criminal Procedure Act 1991 s.209
  • Sudan Evidence Act 1994 Chapter IV Rule 20(2)
  • Sudan Interim Constitution Article 119(1)
  • Sudan Interim Constitution Article 122(1)

Cases cited (30)

  • Spilg and Mack & DITSHWANELO v Botswana (Communication 277/03)
  • International PEN and Others v Nigeria (Communications 137/94-139/94-154/96-161/97)
  • Sudan Human Rights Organization & COHRE v Sudan (Communications 279/03-296/05)
  • Abdel Hadi, Ali Radi & Others v Republic of Sudan (Communication 368/09)
  • Constitutional Rights Project v Nigeria (Communication 60/91)
  • Sir Dawda K Jawara v The Gambia (Communications 147/95 & 149/96)
  • FIDH & Others v Senegal (Communication 304/05)
  • Thomas Kwoyelo v Uganda (Communication 431/12)
  • Media Rights Agenda v Nigeria (Communication 224/98)
  • Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights and Interights v Egypt (Communication 334/06)
  • Malawi African Association and Others v Mauritania (Communications 54/91-61/91-96/93-98/93-164/97-196/97-210/98)
  • Krishna Achuthan and Amnesty International v Malawi (Communications 64/92-68/92-78/92)
  • Monim Elgak, Osman Hummeida and Amir Suliman v Sudan (Communication 379/09)
  • Amnesty International, Comite Loosli Bachelard, Lawyers' Committee for Human Rights, Association of members of the Episcopal Conference of East Africa/Sudan
  • Anuak Justice Council v. Ethiopia
  • Modise v Botswana (Communication 185/2002)
  • Association of Victims of Post Electoral Violence and Interights v Cameroon (Communication 272/03)
  • Jose Alidor Kabambi Beya Ushiye and Others v Democratic Republic of Congo (Communication 408/11)
  • Abubakar Ahmed Mohamed and 28 Others v Ethiopia (Communication 455/13)
  • Haregewoin Gebre-Sellaise & IHRDA v Ethiopia (Communication 301/05)
  • Law Office of Ghazi Suleiman v. Sudan
  • Thomas v. Tanzania
  • Acar and Others v Turkey (Applications 36088/97 and 38417/97)
  • Makaratzis v Greece (Application 50385/99)
  • MB and Others v Slovakia (Application 45322/17)
  • Ilascu and Others v Moldova and Russia (Application 48787/99)
  • Alpar v Turkey (Application 22643/07)
  • Harutyunyan v. Armenia
  • Fernandez v Spain (Communication 1007/2001)
  • Herrera Ulloa (Series C No 107)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Ibrahim Almaz Deng & 6 Others (Represented by the Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa) v Republic of the Sudan (Communication 470-14) [2022] ACHPR 9 (13 May 2022)
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.