Wakilii

Mornah v Republic of Benin (Application No. 028-2018)

African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights · [2022] AfCHPR 22 · 2022 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application filed before the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights alleging violations of human rights of the Sahrawi people arising from Respondent States' failure to protect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic
Decision
Application partly allowed. Respondent States found to have violated Article 20(3) of the African Charter and ordered to take measures to assist the Sahrawi people in their liberation struggle. Request for order compelling expulsion of Morocco from the African Union 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 African Court held that it has jurisdiction and the application is admissible. On the merits, the Court found that the Respondent States violated Article 20(3) of the African Charter by failing to provide assistance to the Sahrawi people in their liberation struggle against Morocco's occupation. However, the Court declined to order the Respondent States to sponsor a resolution for Morocco's expulsion from the African Union, holding that such relief would interfere with the political organs of the AU and exceed the Court's judicial function.

Outcome

Application partly allowed. Respondent States found to have violated Article 20(3) of the African Charter and ordered to take measures to assist the Sahrawi people in their liberation struggle. Request for order compelling expulsion of Morocco from the African Union dismissed.

Facts

The Applicant, a Ghanaian national and political party chairman, filed an application against eight African Union Member States alleging violations of the human rights of the Sahrawi people. The Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR) was admitted to the Organisation of African Unity in 1984. Part of Western Sahara has been occupied by Morocco since 1976 following Spain's departure. In 2017, Morocco was admitted to the African Union. The Applicant alleged that the Respondent States failed to protect the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of the SADR and the right to self-determination of the Sahrawi people, both at the time of Morocco's admission and through their continued inaction regarding the occupation.

Issues

  1. Whether the Court has material jurisdiction to examine an application alleging violations of human rights arising from the admission of Morocco to the African Union and the Respondent States' failure to protect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic.
  2. Whether the Court has personal jurisdiction over the Respondent States and whether the Applicant has locus standi to bring the application.
  3. Whether the Court has temporal and territorial jurisdiction to consider the application.
  4. Whether the application is admissible under Article 56 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.
  5. Whether the Respondent States violated their obligations under the African Charter, the Constitutive Act of the African Union, and international human rights instruments by failing to protect the right to self-determination of the Sahrawi people.
  6. Whether the Respondent States are individually and/or collectively responsible for violations of the human rights of the Sahrawi people arising from Morocco's continued occupation of Western Sahara.

Orders

  • The Court has jurisdiction to hear the Application.
  • The Application is admissible.
  • The Respondent States have violated Article 20(3) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.
  • The Respondent States are ordered to take all necessary measures, individually and collectively, to assist the Sahrawi people in their liberation struggle in accordance with Article 20(3) of the Charter.
  • The Court declines to order the Respondent States to sponsor a resolution for the expulsion of Morocco from the African Union.
  • Each party shall bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Jurisdiction of the African Court — Material Jurisdiction — Applications Raising Political or Diplomatic Issues
The mere fact that an application contains issues relating to State sovereignty or touches on political or diplomatic issues does not automatically remove the Court's competence to consider the application, provided the application contains allegations of violations of human rights protected by the African Charter or any other human rights instrument to which a respondent State is a party.
Jurisdiction — Personal Jurisdiction — Locus Standi — Public Interest Litigation
Articles 5(3) and 34(6) of the Protocol to the African Charter do not require individuals to demonstrate a personal interest in an application or to be victims of the alleged violations in order to access the Court, especially in cases of public interest litigation. The only precondition is that the Respondent State must have ratified the Charter and the Protocol and deposited the Declaration allowing individuals to file cases before the Court.
Jurisdiction — Territorial Jurisdiction — Extraterritorial Application — Right to Self-Determination
By its very nature and the manner in which the right to self-determination is stipulated in the African Charter, the obligation of States extends beyond their national territories and applies extraterritorially towards other peoples whose right to self-determination is yet to be fully respected. The examination of whether State Parties are discharging their obligation towards oppressed or colonised peoples remains within the scope of the Court's territorial competence, notwithstanding that the said peoples are outside the States' national territory.
Admissibility — Exhaustion of Local Remedies — Multiple Respondent States
Where an application is directed against several Respondent States and the reliefs sought require their individual and/or collective action, it is unreasonable to require the applicant to sue all the Respondent States either in his own country or before their respective domestic remedies. The multiplicity of Respondent States and the joint nature of the alleged responsibility constitute grounds for dispensing with the requirement of exhaustion of local remedies.
Right to Self-Determination — Nature and Scope — Obligation Erga Omnes
The right to self-determination has achieved the status of jus cogens or a peremptory norm in international law, thereby generating a corollary obligation erga omnes on all States. No derogation is permitted from the right and all States have a legal interest in protecting that right. The obligations resulting from the right to self-determination are owed by States not only towards those under their jurisdiction but also to all other peoples who are not able to exercise or have been deprived of their right to self-determination.
Right to Self-Determination — Article 20(3) of the African Charter — Duty to Assist Peoples in Liberation Struggle
Article 20(3) of the African Charter imposes on State Parties an obligation to provide assistance to peoples in their liberation struggle against foreign domination. This obligation is both positive (requiring States to take affirmative measures to support liberation struggles) and negative (requiring States to refrain from actions that would undermine or impede such struggles). The obligation applies to all peoples struggling for self-determination without geographical or temporal limitations.
State Responsibility — Limits of Judicial Relief — Separation of Powers within International Organisations
While a human rights court may find that States have violated their obligations under human rights instruments, the court must respect the separation of powers within international organisations and refrain from ordering relief that would interfere with the functions of political organs. A court cannot compel Member States to sponsor resolutions in the political organs of an international organisation or to seek the expulsion of another Member State, as such matters fall within the exclusive competence of the organisation's political decision-making bodies.

Legislation cited (33)

  • 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 7
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 13
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 19
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 20
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 21
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 22
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 23
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 24
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 27
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 28
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 29
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56
  • Constitutive Act of the African Union Article 3
  • Constitutive Act of the African Union Article 4
  • Constitutive Act of the African Union Article 6
  • Constitutive Act of the African Union Article 9
  • Constitutive Act of the African Union Article 26
  • Constitutive Act of the African Union Article 29
  • 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 4
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 5
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 6
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 34
  • International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 1
  • International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 2
  • International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Article 1
  • International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Article 2
  • African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance Article 1
  • African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance Article 2
  • Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties Article 19
  • Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties Article 29

Cases cited (10)

  • Actions pour la Protection de Droits de l'Homme (APDH) v Côte d'Ivoire (merits) (8 November 2016) 1 AfCLR 668
  • Femi Falana v African Union (jurisdiction) (26 June 2012) 1 AfCLR 118
  • African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights v Libya (merits) (3 June 2016) 1 AfCLR 153
  • Tanganyika Law Society and Another v. United Republic of Tanzania, Application No. 009/2011
  • XYZ v Republic of Benin (Application No. 010/2020)
  • Western Sahara, Advisory Opinion, ICJ GL No 61, [1975] ICJ Rep 12
  • East Timor (Portugal v Australia) [1995] ICJ Rep 90
  • Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965, ICJ Advisory Opinion, 25 February 2019
  • Barcelona Traction (Second Phase) [1970] ICJ Rep 3
  • Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, ICJ Advisory Opinion Of 9 July 2004

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Mornah v Republic of Benin (Application No. 028-2018) [2022] AfCHPR 22 (22 September 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.