Wakilii

Kante and Others v Republic of Mali

African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights · [2021] AfCHPR 41 · 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 alleging violation of rights during domestic legal proceedings following dismissal by employer
Decision
Application dismissed for non-exhaustion of local remedies

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 had jurisdiction but declared the application inadmissible for failure to exhaust local remedies. The applicants filed their application while an appeal in cassation was still pending before the Supreme Court of Mali. The Court found that the delay in the domestic proceedings was attributable to the applicants' own negligence in filing their supplemental memorandum seven months after lodging the appeal, and therefore the proceedings were not unduly prolonged within the meaning of the exhaustion requirement.

Outcome

Application dismissed for non-exhaustion of local remedies

Facts

Moussa Kante and thirty-nine other Malian nationals were employed by SAER-emploi, a company that recruits workers for the mining sector. In January 2015, their employer withdrew their access badges to the workplace without serving any dismissal documents, preventing them from working. The applicants received no compensation. They filed suit in the Sikasso Labour Tribunal on 19 January 2016, claiming reinstatement and back wages. The Tribunal ruled in their favour by Judgment No. 010/JUGT of 11 May 2016. SAER-emploi appealed, and the Court of Appeal of Bamako declared the action inadmissible by Judgment No. 190 of 15 December 2016. The applicants filed an appeal in cassation at the Supreme Court on 9 November 2017. While that appeal was still pending, they filed an application to the African Court on 21 February 2019. The Supreme Court rendered its decision on 15 December 2020, dismissing the appeal.

Issues

  1. Whether the Court has jurisdiction to hear the application.
  2. Whether the applicants exhausted local remedies before filing the application to the African Court.
  3. Whether the proceedings before the Supreme Court of Mali were unduly prolonged such as to excuse non-exhaustion of local remedies.

Orders

  • Declared that the Court has jurisdiction.
  • Upheld the objection to admissibility based on non-exhaustion of local remedies.
  • Declared the application inadmissible.
  • Ordered that each party shall bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Exhaustion of Local Remedies — Requirement to Await Outcome of Domestic Proceedings
The requirement of exhaustion of local remedies presupposes that the applicant not only initiates domestic remedies but also awaits their outcome before bringing a case before an international human rights court.
Civil Procedure — Exhaustion of Local Remedies — Assessment of Undue Prolongation
The assessment of whether proceedings relating to local remedies are unduly prolonged must be carried out on a case-by-case basis according to the specific circumstances of each case, taking into account the complexity of the case, the conduct of the parties, and whether the judicial authorities displayed passivity or definite negligence.
Civil Procedure — Exhaustion of Local Remedies — Applicant's Own Negligence
Where delay in domestic proceedings is attributable to the applicant's own negligence, such as filing a required supplemental memorandum seven months after lodging an appeal when the law grants only thirty days, the applicant cannot rely on undue prolongation to excuse non-exhaustion of local remedies.

Legislation cited (19)

  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 3(1)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 3(2)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 7(1)(a)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 7(1)(b)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56
  • 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 6(2)
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 22
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 34(6)
  • Rules of Court Rule 9(2)
  • Rules of Court Rule 32(2)
  • Rules of Court Rule 49(1)
  • Rules of Court Rule 50(1)
  • Rules of Court Rule 50(2)
  • Rules of Court Rule 50(2)(e)
  • Labour Code of Mali (Law No. 92-020 of 23 September 1992) Article 217
  • Organic Law No. 2016-046 of 23 September 2016 Article 87
  • Organic Law No. 2016-046 of 23 September 2016 Article 133
  • Organic Law No. 2016-046 of 23 September 2016 Article 147

Cases cited (5)

  • Yacouba Traoré v Republic of Mali (Application No. 010/2018)
  • Beneficiaries of Norbert Zongo and Others v Burkina Faso (Merits)
  • Mariam Kouma and Ousmane Diabaté v Republic of Mali (Merits)
  • Wilfred Onyango Nganyi and 9 Others v Tanzania (Merits)
  • Frank David Omary and Others v United Republic of Tanzania (Admissibility)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kante and Others v Republic of Mali [2021] AfCHPR 41 (25 June 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.