Wakilii

Konaté v Burkina Faso (Judgment on Reparations) (Application 004-2013)

African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights · [2016] AfCHPR 40 · 2016 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for reparations following judgment on merits finding violations of freedom of expression
Decision
Application for reparations granted in part; Applicant awarded monetary compensation and restitution measures; claim for loss of equipment dismissed

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 Court ordered Burkina Faso to expunge the Applicant's criminal convictions, revise downwards the fines and damages to comply with necessity and proportionality, and pay 25,000,000 CFA Francs for loss of income, 108,000 CFA Francs for medical and transport expenses, and 10,000,000 CFA Francs for moral damage. The Court dismissed claims for loss of goods and equipment for lack of evidence.

Outcome

Application for reparations granted in part; Applicant awarded monetary compensation and restitution measures; claim for loss of equipment dismissed

Facts

The Applicant, a journalist, published two articles in his newspaper L'Ouragan in August 2012 concerning alleged criminal conduct by state officials. The State Prosecutor filed suit for defamation, public insult and abusive language against a judicial officer. On 29 October 2012, the Ouagadougou High Court convicted the Applicant and sentenced him to 12 months imprisonment, a fine of 1,500,000 CFA Francs, damages of 4,500,000 CFA Francs, costs of 250,000 CFA Francs, and suspended publication of L'Ouragan for six months. The Court of Appeal upheld this decision on 10 May 2013. In a judgment of 5 December 2014, the African Court found that Burkina Faso violated the Applicant's freedom of expression rights and ordered the State to make reparations. The Applicant then filed this application seeking various forms of reparation for material and moral damage.

Issues

  1. What forms of reparation should be awarded to the Applicant for violations of his freedom of expression rights?
  2. Whether the Applicant's criminal convictions should be expunged from his judicial record?
  3. What quantum of compensation should be awarded for material damage including loss of income and family expenses?
  4. What quantum of compensation should be awarded for moral damage suffered by the Applicant and his family?

Orders

  • Respondent State to expunge from the Applicant's judicial records all criminal convictions pronounced against him.
  • Respondent State to revise downwards the amount of fines, damages and costs charged against the Applicant to ensure compliance with criteria of necessity and proportionality.
  • Respondent State to pay the Applicant 25,000,000 CFA Francs (equivalent to US$ 50,000) as compensation for loss of income.
  • Respondent State to refund 108,000 CFA Francs (equivalent to US$ 216) incurred by the Applicant as medical and transport expenses.
  • Respondent State to pay 10,000,000 CFA Francs (equivalent to US$ 20,000) to the Applicant as compensation for moral damage suffered by him and his family.
  • Applicant's claim in respect of loss of goods and purchase of new equipment dismissed.
  • Respondent State to pay all amounts within six months, failing which interest on arrears calculated on the basis of the applicable rate of the Central Bank of the Community of West African States (BCEAO) throughout the period of delayed payment.
  • Respondent State to publish within six months the summary of this judgment in French once in the Official Gazette of Burkina Faso and once in a widely read national daily, and publish the same summary on an official website for one year.
  • Respondent State to submit within six months from the date of publication a report on the status of implementation of all decisions.

Rules and key headnotes

Reparations — General Principles — Full Reparation for Internationally Wrongful Acts
A State found liable of an internationally wrongful act is required to make full reparation for the damage caused, including restitution, compensation, rehabilitation of the victim and measures to ensure non-repetition of violations.
Reparations — Burden of Proof — Causal Link
For reparation to accrue, there must be a causal link between the established wrongful act and the alleged prejudice, and the burden of proof lies with the applicant to show justification for the amounts claimed.
Reparations — Restitution — Expungement of Criminal Convictions
Where a court finds that a criminal conviction violated international human rights obligations, restitution requires expungement of the conviction from the applicant's judicial record to restore the status quo ante.
Compensation — Material Damage — Loss of Income — Assessment on Equity Basis
Where an applicant claims loss of income but fails to produce sufficient documentary evidence to substantiate the full amount claimed, the court may assess compensation on the basis of equity and reduce the award to a reasonable sum.
Compensation — Material Damage — Loss of Property — Requirement of Evidence
Claims for compensation for loss of physical belongings and expenses for replacement equipment require documentary evidence and proof of causal link between the wrongful act and the damage; in the absence of such evidence, the claim must be dismissed.
Compensation — Moral Damage — Presumption in Human Rights Cases
Moral prejudice is often assumed by international courts in cases of human rights violations, and compensation may be awarded on the basis of equity where the respondent state does not contest that such prejudice was suffered.

Legislation cited (3)

  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 9
  • International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 19
  • Revised Treaty of the Economic Community of West African States Article 66(2)(c)

Cases cited (6)

  • Beneficiaries of Late Norbert Zongo v Burkina Faso (Application 013-2011)
  • Reverend Christopher R. Mtikila v United Republic of Tanzania (Application 011-2011)
  • Mapiripán massacre v. Colombia, Series C, No. 134 (2005)
  • Lori Berenson-Mejía v. Peru, Series C, No. 119 (2004)
  • Lepajic v. Serbia, Application No. 15909/05 (2007)
  • Mitrat Vural v. [Turkey], Application No. 9540/07 (2014)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Konaté v Burkina Faso (Judgment on Reparations) (Application 004-2013) [2016] AfCHPR 40 (3 June 2016)
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.