Richard v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 035-2016)

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.

Holding

The African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights held that Tanzania violated the applicant's right to be tried within a reasonable time under Article 7(1)(d) of the African Charter. The applicant's criminal appeal filed in 2008 was not determined until 2018, a delay of almost ten years. The Court found no complexity in the case to justify the delay, and the applicant demonstrated due diligence by sending seven letters of enquiry. The delay was attributable to lack of due diligence by national authorities. The Court awarded TZS 5,000,000 as reparations for moral prejudice.

Outcome

Application granted; violation of right to be tried within a reasonable time established; reparations awarded; respondent state ordered to publish judgment and report on implementation

Facts

The applicant was charged on 22 August 2004 with sodomizing a child aged one year and five months. He was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. He appealed to the High Court of Tanzania at Dar es Salaam in Criminal Appeal No. 84 of 2008. The hearing of his appeal began on 15 April 2009 but remained pending at the time of filing the application on 8 June 2016. The applicant sent seven letters of enquiry to the High Court Registry between 7 June 2012 and 3 August 2015 seeking resolution of his appeal. On 12 August 2015, the Deputy Registrar responded asking him to be patient. On 26 September 2018, the High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction, set aside the sentence, and ordered the applicant's release. The respondent state did not participate in the proceedings before the African Court.

Issues

1. Whether the Applicant's right to be tried within a reasonable time under Article 7(1)(d) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights was violated by the delay in determining his criminal appeal.

Orders

• Declared that it has jurisdiction.
• Declared that the Application is admissible.
• Found that the Respondent State violated the right of the Applicant to be tried within a reasonable time protected under Article 7(1)(d) of the Charter.
• Granted Tanzanian Shillings Five Million (TZS 5,000,000) as reparations for moral prejudice in relation to the inordinate delay of the Applicant's appeal.
• Ordered the Respondent State to pay the amount indicated within six (6) months, effective from the notification of this Judgment, failing which it will pay interest on arrears calculated on the basis of the applicable rate of the Bank of Tanzania throughout the period of delayed payment and until the accrued amount is fully paid.
• Ordered the Respondent State to publish this Judgment on the websites of the Judiciary and the Ministry for Constitutional and Legal Affairs within a period of three (3) months from the date of notification, and to ensure that the text of the Judgment remains accessible for at least one (1) year after the date of publication.
• Ordered 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.
• Ordered each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (8)

• 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 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 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 34(6)
• African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 7(1)(d)
• African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56
• Constitutive Act of the African Union Article 3(h)

Cases cited (18)

• Andrew Ambrose Cheusi v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 004/2015)
• African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights v Libya (Merits) (2016) 1 AfCLR 153
• Beneficiaries of late Norbert Zongo and Others v Burkina Faso (Preliminary Objections) (2013) 1 AfCLR 197
• Mohamed Abubakari v Tanzania (Merits) (2016) 1 AfCLR 599
• Alex Thomas v Tanzania (Merits) (2015) 1 AfCLR 465
• Wilfred Onyango Nganyi and Others v Tanzania (Merits) (2016) 1 AfCLR 507
• Lohé Issa Konaté v Burkina Faso (Merits) (2014) 1 AfCLR 314
• Peter Joseph Chacha v Tanzania (Admissibility) (2014) 1 AfCLR 398
• Anudo v United Republic of Tanzania (Merits) (2018) 2 AfCLR 248
• Mgosi Mwita Makungu v United Republic of Tanzania (Merits) (2018) 2 AfCLR 550
• Armand Guehi v Tanzania (Merits and Reparations) (2018) 2 AfCLR 477
• Norbert Zongo and Others v Burkina Faso (Merits) (2014) 1 AfCLR 219
• Norbert Zongo and Others v Burkina Faso (Reparations) (2015) 1 AfCLR 258
• Lohé Issa Konaté v Burkina Faso (Reparations) (2016) 1 AfCLR 346
• Reverend Christopher R. Mtikila v. Tanzania (reparations), §§ 27-29
• Diocles William v Tanzania (Merits) (2018) 2 AfCLR 426
• Minani Evarist v Tanzania (Merits) (2018) 2 AfCLR 402
• Jibu Amir Mussa and Saidi Ally alias Mangaya v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 014/2015)

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