Wakilii

Onyachi and Another v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 003-2015)

African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights · [2021] AfCHPR 24 · 2021 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for reparations following judgment on merits finding violations of Articles 1, 6 and 7(1)(a), (b) and (c) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights
Decision
Applicants awarded TZS 5,000,000 each in moral damages and ordered released from custody; other claims for material damages, legal fees, and reparations for indirect victims 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 on Human and Peoples' Rights granted the applicants' prayer for moral damages, awarding each TZS 5,000,000 for violations of their rights to liberty and fair trial established in the merits judgment. The Court ordered the applicants' release from custody, finding compelling reasons based on the nature of violations, their eighteen years' imprisonment in a foreign country, and having served almost two-thirds of their sentence. The Court dismissed claims for material prejudice, legal fees from national proceedings, and reparations for indirect victims due to lack of evidence establishing causal link and proof of loss. Each party was ordered to bear its own costs.

Outcome

Applicants awarded TZS 5,000,000 each in moral damages and ordered released from custody; other claims for material damages, legal fees, and reparations for indirect victims dismissed

Facts

The applicants, Kennedy Owino Onyachi and Charles John Mwanini Njoka, were arrested and extradited from Kenya to Tanzania where they were convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to thirty years' imprisonment. In a judgment on merits dated 28 September 2017, the African Court found that Tanzania violated the applicants' rights to liberty and fair trial under Articles 1, 6 and 7(1)(a), (b) and (c) of the African Charter. The violations included re-arresting and detaining the applicants after they were acquitted by the Resident Magistrate's Court, failing to provide them with free legal assistance at the Court of Appeal, and dismissing their defence of alibi without proper consideration. The applicants filed submissions for reparations on 30 July 2018, claiming pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages for themselves and their family members. At the time of the reparations judgment, the applicants had been imprisoned for eighteen years, having served almost two-thirds of their thirty-year sentence in a foreign country far from their homes and families.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicants are entitled to pecuniary reparations for material prejudice they allegedly suffered as a result of their conviction and imprisonment.
  2. Whether the applicants' indirect victims are entitled to pecuniary reparations for material prejudice allegedly suffered.
  3. Whether the applicants are entitled to reimbursement of legal fees incurred in proceedings before national courts.
  4. Whether the applicants are entitled to moral damages for violations of their rights to liberty and fair trial.
  5. Whether indirect victims are entitled to moral damages.
  6. Whether the applicants should be released from custody as a form of non-pecuniary reparation.
  7. Whether the applicants are entitled to restitution.
  8. Whether the applicants are entitled to costs and legal fees for proceedings before the African Court.

Orders

  • Dismisses the Applicants' prayer for damages for material prejudice they allegedly suffered.
  • Dismisses the Applicants' prayer for damages for material prejudice allegedly suffered by the indirect victims.
  • Dismisses the Applicants' prayer for damages for moral prejudice allegedly suffered by indirect victims.
  • Dismisses the Applicants' claims for reimbursement for legal fees allegedly incurred during proceedings before national courts.
  • Grants the Applicants' prayer for damages for moral prejudice suffered due to the violations found and awards Mr Kennedy Owino Onyachi and Charles John Mwaniki Njoka the sum of Tanzanian Shillings Five Million (TZS 5,000,000) each in reparations.
  • Orders the Respondent State to pay the amounts indicated above free from taxes effective within six (6) months from the date of notification of this Judgment, failing which it will pay interest on arrears calculated on the basis of the applicable rate of the Central Bank of Tanzania throughout the period of delayed payment until the amount is fully paid.
  • Grants the Applicants' prayer and orders their release from custody.
  • Orders the Respondent State to submit to it within six (6) months from the date of notification of this judgment, a report on the status of implementation of the decision set forth herein and thereafter, every six (6) months until the Court considers that there has been full implementation thereof.
  • Dismisses the Applicants' prayer related to legal fees, costs and other expenses incurred in the proceedings before this Court.
  • Orders each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Reparations — Burden and Standard of Proof — Material Prejudice
For a claim for material prejudice to be granted, an applicant must show a causal link between the established violation and the loss suffered, and further prove the loss suffered through documentary evidence such as business licences, registration with revenue authorities, or other proof of the existence and value of assets allegedly lost.
Reparations — Indirect Victims — Requirements for Material Damages
Indirect victims claiming reparations for material prejudice must submit evidence of filiation with an applicant and proof of the alleged prejudice, such as medical bills or receipts of payments for transportation, food and legal assistance, and must demonstrate the existence of a causal link between the established human rights violations and the material prejudice allegedly suffered.
Reparations — Moral Prejudice — Presumption and Assessment
Moral prejudice is presumed in cases of human rights violations, and quantum of damages in this respect is assessed based on equity, taking into account the circumstances of the case, with the Court adopting the practice of granting a lump sum in such instances.
Reparations — Indirect Victims — Moral Prejudice — Proof Requirements
With regard to indirect victims, moral prejudice is presumed with respect to parents, children and spouses, while for other categories of indirect victims, proof of existence of moral prejudice is required. Reparation is granted only when there is evidence of spousal relation, marital status or for other close relatives, through documents showing filiation with an applicant, which include birth certificates for children and parents.
Reparations — Release from Custody — Compelling Circumstances
Release from custody can be ordered as a form of reparation in specific and compelling circumstances, particularly where an applicant's arrest or conviction is based on arbitrary considerations and continued imprisonment would occasion a miscarriage of justice, or where the nature of established violations, length of imprisonment, and circumstances such as imprisonment in a foreign country far from home and family create compelling reasons for release.
Reparations — Legal Fees — Proof Requirements
Reparations may include the reimbursement of legal fees and other costs incurred during domestic proceedings and international proceedings, but it is incumbent upon an applicant to provide proof for the amounts claimed, such as retainer agreements with counsel, receipts of payment of legal fees, or bank transfers.

Legislation cited (12)

  • 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 27(1)
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 3
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 1
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 6
  • 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 7(1)(c)
  • Rules of Court Rule 9(2)
  • Rules of Court Rule 63
  • Rules of Court Rule 32(2)
  • Rules of Court Rule 70(1)

Cases cited (15)

  • Mohamed Abubakari v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 007/2013)
  • Alex Thomas v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 005/2013)
  • Lucien Ikili Rashidi v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 009/2015)
  • Ingabire Victoire Umuhoza v Rwanda (2018) 2 AfCLR 202
  • Reverend Christopher R. Mtikila v United Republic of Tanzania (2014) 1 AfCLR 72
  • Lohé Issa Konaté v Burkina Faso (2016) 1 AfCLR 346
  • Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay. Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. C) No. 146 (Mar. 29, 2006)
  • Young, James & Webster v. United Kingdom, 44 Eur.Ct.H.R. (ser. A) (1981)
  • Armand Guehi v United Republic of Tanzania (7 December 2018) 2 AfCLR 477
  • Norbert Zongo and Others v. Burkina Faso (reparations)
  • Christopher Jonas v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 011/2015)
  • Léon Mugesera v Rwanda (Application No. 012/2017)
  • Minani Evarist v United Republic of Tanzania (2018) 2 AfCLR 402
  • Mgosi Mwita Makungu v United Republic of Tanzania (2018) 2 AfCLR 550
  • The Sudan Human Rights Organisation & Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE) vs. Sudan

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Onyachi and Another v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 003-2015) [2021] AfCHPR 24 (30 September 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.