Wakilii

Interights and Another v Nigeria (Communication 248 of 2002)

African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights · [2004] ACHPR 57 · 2004 Communication Inadmissible 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 systematic human rights violations
Decision
Communication dismissed as inadmissible without consideration of 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 Commission declared the communication inadmissible for non-exhaustion of local remedies. Despite the complainants' assertion that the scale and nature of alleged violations precluded exhaustion of domestic remedies, they failed to furnish written submissions on admissibility after multiple reminders across three ordinary sessions. The Commission held that complainants had not shown whether they exhausted local remedies as required by Article 56(5) of the African Charter.

Outcome

Communication dismissed as inadmissible without consideration of merits

Facts

Between May 1999 and March 2002, complainants alleged that Nigeria engaged in extra-judicial executions, state-sponsored violence and impunity through its armed forces and law enforcement agencies, resulting in over ten thousand deaths and displacement of over one million persons. Complainants filed a communication on behalf of anonymous individuals alleging systematic violations of the African Charter. The complaint was received in April 2002. At the 31st Ordinary Session in May 2002, the Commission decided to be seized of the matter and requested submissions on admissibility. Despite reminders at the 32nd, 33rd and 34th Ordinary Sessions, complainants failed to submit written arguments on admissibility. At the 35th Ordinary Session in June 2004, the Commission considered the communication.

Issues

  1. Whether the complainants exhausted local remedies as required by Article 56(5) of the African Charter before bringing the communication.
  2. Whether the epidemiology of alleged violations precluded the requirement to exhaust domestic remedies.

Orders

  • Communication declared inadmissible due to non-exhaustion of local remedies.

Rules and key headnotes

Human Rights — Admissibility — Exhaustion of Local Remedies — Burden of Proof
A complainant before the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights bears the burden of demonstrating that local remedies have been exhausted as required by Article 56(5) of the African Charter, and failure to furnish submissions on this requirement after multiple opportunities will result in inadmissibility.
Administrative Law — Procedural Requirements — Compliance with Directions — Consequences of Non-Compliance
Where a tribunal requests parties to make submissions on a preliminary issue and provides multiple opportunities across several sessions, failure by a party to comply with such directions will be fatal to their case on that issue.
Human Rights — Admissibility — Exhaustion of Local Remedies — Exception for Large-Scale Violations
While the African Commission has recognised that the requirement to exhaust local remedies need not be applied literally where there are large numbers of victims and remedies are impractical or unavailable, a complainant must still make submissions demonstrating why the exception applies to their case.

Legislation cited (19)

  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 1
  • 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 4
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 5
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 7(1)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 12(1)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 13(1)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 13(2)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 14
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 15
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 16
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 17(1)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 17(2)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 18
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 25
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 26
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56(1)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56(5)

Cases cited (1)

  • Free Legal Group et al v Zaire (Communication 25 of 1989)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Interights and Another v Nigeria (Communication 248 of 2002) [2004] ACHPR 57 (4 June 2004)
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.