Wakilii

Ligue Camerounaise des Droits de L'Homme v Cameroon (Communication 65 of 1992)

African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights · Ligue Camerounaise des Droits de L'Homme v Cameroon (Communication 65 of 1992) [1997] ACHPR 1 (24 April 1997) · 1997 Communication Inadmissible AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Communication alleging human rights violations submitted to the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights
Decision
Communication declared inadmissible

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 on Human and Peoples' Rights declared the communication inadmissible. The communication contained insulting language directed against the State of Cameroon, including phrases such as 'regime of torturers' and 'government barbarisms', violating Article 56.3 of the African Charter. Additionally, the communication lacked the degree of specificity required to permit the Commission to take meaningful action.

Outcome

Communication declared inadmissible

Facts

The Ligue Camerounaise des Droits de L'Homme submitted a communication alleging serious and massive human rights violations in Cameroon, including torture, arbitrary detention, cruel prison conditions, repression of freedom of expression, denial of fair hearing, ethnic discrimination, and massacres. The communication alleged that between 1984 and 1989 at least 46 persons were tortured and deprived of food in the Central Prison of Yaoundé. A second part of the communication related to Mr Joseph Vitine, an ex-police officer who claimed persecution by former colleagues since March 1990. The Government of Cameroon responded that the allegations were posed in disparaging and insulting language. The Commission received the communication before March 1992 and was seized of it at the 11th Session.

Issues

  1. Whether the communication should be declared inadmissible for being written in disparaging or insulting language under Article 56.3 of the African Charter.
  2. Whether the communication contained sufficient specificity to permit the Commission to take meaningful action.

Orders

  • Communication declared inadmissible.

Rules and key headnotes

Human Rights — Admissibility of Communications — Insulting Language
A communication to the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights shall not be considered if it is written in disparaging or insulting language directed against the State concerned and its institutions, as required by Article 56.3 of the African Charter.
Administrative Law — Procedural Requirements — Specificity of Complaints
Communications submitted to the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights must contain a sufficient degree of specificity to permit the Commission to take meaningful action.
Human Rights — Commission Powers — Discretion to Decline Jurisdiction
The power of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights to consider communications under Article 55.2 of the African Charter naturally includes the lesser power to decline to hear them.

Legislation cited (2)

  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 55.2
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56.3

Cases cited (1)

  • Center for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers v Algeria (Communications 104/93, 109/94-126/94)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Ligue Camerounaise des Droits de L'Homme v Cameroon (Communication 65 of 1992) [1997] ACHPR 1 (24 April 1997)
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.