Wakilii

Shereen Said Hamd Bakhet v Arab Republic of Egypt (Communication 658 of 2017)

African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights · [2018] ACHPR 7 · 2018 Communication Struck Out AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Human rights communication before the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights struck out for want of diligent prosecution
Decision
Communication struck out without consideration of merits due to complainant's failure to prosecute diligently

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 struck out the communication for lack of diligent prosecution. The complainant was granted two months to submit on admissibility following seizure, failed to do so, was granted a further 30-day extension, and still failed to submit. More than three months after the final deadline expired, no submissions had been received.

Outcome

Communication struck out without consideration of merits due to complainant's failure to prosecute diligently

Facts

The complainants filed a communication on behalf of Shereen Said Hamd Bakhet alleging violations of the African Charter by Egypt. The allegations included arbitrary arrest, detention, torture, and denial of fair trial rights. The Commission was seized of the communication and granted provisional measures during its 22nd Extra-Ordinary Session in July-August 2017. By letter dated 28 August 2017, the complainant was requested to submit arguments on admissibility within two months. The complainant failed to submit within the prescribed period. On 7 July 2018, the complainant was granted a further 30-day extension. More than three months after this extended deadline expired, no submissions had been received from the complainant.

Issues

  1. Whether the communication should be struck out for lack of diligent prosecution where the complainant failed to submit arguments on admissibility within the prescribed time limits.

Orders

  • Communication struck out for lack of diligent prosecution.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Strike Out — Diligent Prosecution — Failure to Comply with Time Limits
Where a complainant before the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights fails to submit arguments on admissibility within the prescribed two-month period, is granted a further extension of 30 days, and still fails to submit more than three months after the extended deadline, the Commission will strike out the communication for lack of diligent prosecution.

Cases cited (4)

  • Mohammed Ramadan Mahmoud Fayad Allah v Arab Republic of Egypt (Communication 594 of 2015)
  • Ahmed Mohammed Ali Subaie v Arab Republic of Egypt (Communication 612 of 2016)
  • Journal Echos du Nord v Gabon (Communication 412 of 2012)
  • Kofi Yamagnane v Republic of Togo (Communication 387 of 2010)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Shereen Said Hamd Bakhet v Arab Republic of Egypt (Communication 658 of 2017) [2018] ACHPR 7 (13 November 2018)
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.