Recent Developments in the African Human Rights System 2011/12

2012 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 158-172
Author(s):  
Gina Bekker
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
African Union ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Welfare Of The Child ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
African Commission

A number of important developments have taken place in the African regional human rights system. This article surveys some of the key developments with respect to human rights within the African Union covering the period from 1 January 2011 to 31 January 2012. Consideration in this regard is given to a number of matters including the extension of the jurisdiction of the African Court of Justice and Human Rights to try international crimes, the issue of lack of individual access to the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights as well as the promotional and protectional work of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the African Committee on the Rights and Welfare of the Child.

‘Saddling’ the New African Regional Human Rights Court with International Criminal Jurisdiction: Innovative, Obstructive, Expedient?

2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincent O. Nmehielle
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
African Union ◽  
Political Commitment ◽  
Member States ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Recent Initiative

Abstract This article examines the recent initiative of the African Union (au) to amend the Protocol on the Statute of the African Court of Justice and Human Rights that initially merged the African Court of Human Peoples’ Rights with the African Court of Justice of the African Union and to now create a new and holistic regional court – the African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights – and endow it with jurisdiction for international crimes. The article principally interrogates three issues: (1) the legality and novelty of the au initiative, (2) the question whether the plan is in any way obstructive or a distraction, and (3) whether the initiative is actually necessary when considered against the wider scheme of effective functioning of the au and its human rights protection regimes. The article finds that while the au’s desire to establish an international crimes chamber within its human rights court may have largely been influenced by the politicisation of the international criminal justice system and its concerns about the icc’s nearly exclusive focus on Africa, there is nothing in international law that prevents the au from embarking on such initiative. However, it is essential for the au to conduct a necessity test, taking a number of issues into account such as adequate resources, credible legal and political commitment, and the opportunity available to member states in the complementarity principle of the Rome Statute of the icc. It is submitted that since Africa, as a regional block, has accepted the Rome Statute regime in large numbers, the au needs to engage with that system in ways that give African states parties credible ownership of justice, as addressing atrocity crimes would largely be achieved within the domestic systems of member states.

The African Court of Justice and Human Rights: A Judicial Curate’s Egg

2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 383-449 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gino J Naldi ◽  
Konstantinos D. Magliveras
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
African Union ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Intergovernmental Organization ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Definition Of

The present article analyzes the African Court of Justice and Human Rights, the proposed “main judicial organ of the African Union”. The African Court of Justice and Human Rights is meant to replace the African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights and would therefore constitute a unique international judicial body combining the jurisdiction of the judicial organ of an intergovernmental organization with the jurisdiction of a regional human rights court. It shares features of the International Court of Justice and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. In a highly contentious move detrimental to the role of the International Criminal Court, it is currently proposed to extend its jurisdiction over international crimes, the definition of which goes much further than that currently accepted by the international community, raising the prospect of conflicting obligations. The Court’s governing instruments are too ambitious and contain some significant flaws and the case for doing away with the now operational African Court of Human Rights and Peoples’ Rights seems unconvincing. Even though the Court has not yet been established, its structure and mandate do pose many challenging questions that deserve to be thoroughly investigated by drawing comparisons with the existing similar judicial organs in other international organizations.

Part I Context, Challenges, and Constraints, 4 The ICC and the AU

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maunganidze Ottilia Anna ◽  
du Plessis Anton
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
African Countries ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
State Immunity ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Head Of State ◽  
Political Background ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

The relationship between the ICC and the AU has become a frequent bone of contention. The impact is naturally political, but it has also had an appreciable influence on ICC practice. This chapter analyses the legal and political background to the persistent disagreement, including the origin and foundation of divergent positions, such as, for instance, on head of state immunity and cooperation duties. It cautions against an oversimplification of ‘African’ views while also highlighting the progress made by some African countries in investigating, prosecuting, and adjudicating international crimes. It further examines the proposed expansion of the African Court of Justice and Human Rights’ jurisdiction to deal with serious crimes, including international crimes, and the implications thereof.

Developments in international criminal law and the case of business involvement in international crimes

2012 ◽  
Vol 94 (887) ◽  
pp. 981-1005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Kyriakakis
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Charles Taylor ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Recent Developments

AbstractIn the wake of the mandate of the Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General for Business and Human Rights (SRSG), international criminal law looks set to play a role in measures towards the legal accountability of business actors involved in gross human rights and humanitarian law violations. Against the backdrop of the SRSG's now completed mandate, this article looks at three recent developments in international criminal law to consider the field's potential relevance to business actors involved in conflict. The first is the newest mode of liability recently adopted by the International Criminal Court, indirect perpetration through an organisation. The second is the aiding and abetting doctrine as applied by the Special Court for Sierra Leone in the Charles Taylor case. The third is the potential uptake of a practice of thematic prosecutions focusing on particular under-regulated issues of concern for the international community.

The African Court with a Criminal Jurisdiction and the ICC: A Case for Overlapping Jurisdiction?

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 418-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zekarias Beshah Abebe
Keyword(s):  
Legal Order ◽  
African Union ◽  
Common Occurrence ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Criminal Jurisdiction ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Territorial Jurisdiction ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Large Numbers ◽  
International Legal Order

One of the issues that the current proliferation of international courts and jurisdictions raised in the international legal order is overlapping jurisdiction. On 27 June 2014, the Assembly of the African Union adopted a protocol on the Amendments to the Protocol on the Statute of the African Court of Justice and Human Rights which extends the jurisdiction of the court to cover international crimes. The decision of the AU to clothe the African court with a criminal jurisdiction has brought, once again, the issue of overlapping jurisdiction to the surface. This article is an attempt to answer the questions: to what extent does the criminal jurisdiction of the African court overlap with the jurisdiction of the ICC, and is the issue of overlapping jurisdiction a common occurrence or an imminent concern? Taking the crimes under the jurisdiction of the courts and the fact that large numbers of African states are state parties to the ICC into consideration, many tend to argue that overlapping jurisdiction is inevitable and is likely to cause friction for the primacy of jurisdiction. However, this article argues that a close scrutiny of the substantive and territorial jurisdiction of the ICC and the African Court suggests that the issue of overlapping jurisdiction is both rare and of remote concern.

The African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights ‘International Criminal Law Section’: Promoting Impunity for African Union Heads of State and Senior State Officials?

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manisuli Ssenyonjo ◽  
Saidat Nakitto
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
African Union ◽  
Criminal Jurisdiction ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Heads Of State ◽  
The Impact

On 27 June 2014 the African Union (au) Assembly adopted a protocol entitled ‘Protocol on Amendments to the Protocol on the Statute of the African Court of Justice and Human Rights’. This Protocol contains an annex entitled ‘Statute of the African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights’. The Protocol and the Statute annexed to it provide for the establishment of a regional court in Africa to be known as the ‘African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights’ (African Court). This Court will, among others, exercise criminal jurisdiction over a wide range of international crimes involving individual criminal responsibility and corporate criminal liability over legal persons (with the exception of States), which goes beyond any other international court or hybrid tribunal. This article considers reasons for establishing a regional court in Africa with criminal jurisdiction and examines the likely effectiveness of the African Court focussing on the wide jurisdiction conferred on the Court; the impact of immunity from criminal prosecution granted to serving au heads of State and other undefined ‘senior State officials’; and the need to strengthen national criminal jurisdictions to enable them to prosecute international crimes in Africa.

The Rise of the African Union Opposition to the International Criminal Court’s Investigations and Prosecutions of African Leaders

2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 385-428 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manisuli Ssenyonjo
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
African State ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
African Union ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
State Immunity ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Head Of State ◽  
International Court

On 9 January 2012 the African Union (AU) stated that it ‘shall oppose any ill-considered, self-serving decisions of the ICC [International Criminal Court] as well as any pretensions or double standards that become evident from the investigations, prosecutions and decisions by the ICC relating to situations in Africa’. These relate to the United Nations [UN] Security Council referrals (in Darfur/Sudan and Libya) and the Prosecutor’s investigations proprio motu (in Kenya). This article considers the rise of the AU opposition to the ICC investigations and prosecutions in Africa directed against current African State leaders focusing on three issues. First, whether customary international law creates an exception to Head of State immunity when international courts, such as the ICC, seek a Head of State’s arrest for the commission of international crimes. Second, whether the International Court of Justice can decide on immunity of State officials sought by the ICC. Third, whether the AU should empower the African Court of Justice and Human Rights with the jurisdiction to prosecute individuals for international crimes committed in Africa.

scholarly journals From the Establishment of the Court of Justice of the African Union to Malabo Protocol: The Defies to the Regional Judicial Mode of Protection of Human Rights

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walid Fahmy
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
The Other ◽  
African Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Method

The judicial method of dispute resolution has aroused in Africa countless turnarounds of positions, from rejection to acceptance, from construction to destruction, to allow its transformation. It seems to have recently stabilized in the figure of the African Court of Justice and Human Rights, merging the two existing regional judicial bodies. It is already known to us that the two Tribunals have two main pre-defined functions, one that deals with the resolution of conflicts between States of the continent and the other on the protection of human rights, which are quite different roles. So, in this article, we analyze all impediments of the judicial system of African human rights to answer the question of whether it is best for African human rights to keep the tribunals separate, regardless of the desire to reduce costs or merger is better to ensure more effectively the protection of human rights?

The African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights: Safeguarding the Interests of African States

2007 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 151-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gina Bekker
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Future ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Creation ◽  
African Commission

AbstractThis article examines the extent to which the decision to establish the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights was motivated by the desire of African states to safeguard their own interests at the expense of effectively protecting human rights in Africa. Using an examination of the drafting history of the Banjul Charter and the establishment of the African Commission as a background, this article explores the potential implications for the future of human rights protection on the continent as a result of the creation of the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights and its proposed merger with the African Court of Justice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document