S.O.S. Esclaves v Mauritania (Communication 198 of 1997)
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 declared the communication inadmissible for non-exhaustion of internal remedies. The complainant alleged slavery practices in Mauritania but failed to provide information on the status of domestic proceedings initiated by the supposed victims. The Commission could not determine whether internal remedies had been exhausted or whether they had allowed victims to have their rights restored. The complainant may re-seize the Commission once the conditions of article 56(5) have been fulfilled.
Outcome
Communication declared inadmissible; complainant may re-submit after exhausting internal remedies
Facts
SOS-Esclaves, an NGO, alleged that slavery remained a common practice in Mauritania despite legal prohibition. The complainant provided a March 1996 report citing specific examples: ten adults sold and bought as slaves, children from four families enslaved by their parents' masters, four children sold as slaves, two women married to their masters against their will, and six individuals and their families dispossessed of ancestral property. The complainant alleged the Mauritanian government was informed of these practices and occasionally supported the perpetrators. SOS-Esclaves requested government investigations but received no response. The complainant indicated that internal procedures had been initiated by supposed victims but provided no information on the status of those proceedings.
Issues
- Whether the communication is admissible where the complainant has not demonstrated exhaustion of internal remedies.
- Whether the Commission can proceed where the status of domestic proceedings remains unclear.
Orders
- Communication declared inadmissible due to non-exhaustion of internal remedies.
- Complainant retains the opportunity to seize the Commission again once the conditions of article 56(5) have been fulfilled.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (10)
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights art.2
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights art.3
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights art.4
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights art.5
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights art.6
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights art.7
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights art.9
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights art.11
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights art.15
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights art.56(5)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.