The Implementation of the African Charter
on Human and Peoples’ Rights by the
States parties
By
DR. Rachidatou ILLA MAIKASSOUA
October 2011
The present symposium offers a twofold perspective. It is aimed, on the one hand, at
reviewing 30 years of application of the African Charter and, on the other hand, at assessing
current challenges and future prospects in relation to the promotion and protection of human
rights in Africa.
1
Our contribution focuses on the former aspect; however, it does not purport to provide an
exhaustive exposition of the theme. An initial study of this kind was carried out on the subject
in 2004.1 It remains, however, that at the present time it is still very difficult in many ways to
assess the precise impact of the African Charter on domestic law. Therefore, this study will
restrict its focus to a selective overview of the impact that the instrument has had on domestic
law in certain Contracting States.
The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (hereinafter, the African Charter) was
adopted on 27 June 1981 in Nairobi, Kenya. It entered into force on 21 October 1986,
following its ratification by the 26th State. The Charter has now been ratified by 53 out of the
54 African Union member States.2 It comprises a set of 68 articles and two additional
Protocols: the first being the Protocol on the Establishment of an African Court on Human
and Peoples’ Rights, adopted in 1998, and the second, the Protocol on the Rights of Women
in Africa, adopted in 2003.3 These two protocols were intended as complements to the
Charter: the former focusing on the organization, running and procedures of the African
mechanism (Protocol on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples’
Rights), whilst the latter provided a complement to the list of rights guaranteed by the African
instrument (Protocol on the Rights of Women).
In this article, domestication of the African Charter shall be understood to cover the process
ranging from receipt of the African protection instrument to actual observation of its impact
and consequences on domestic law. This requirement directly ensures from Article 1 of the
Charter, under whose terms: ‘The Member States of the Organization of African Unity parties
to the present Charter shall recognize the rights, duties and freedoms enshrined in this
Chapter and shall undertake to adopt legislative or other measures to give effect to them.’ It
is therefore up to the Contracting States to give effect to the provisions of the African Charter.
They are bound to take action by adopting all appropriate measures, be they legislative,
administrative, social, economic, educational or judicial, etc. to ensure the enforcement of the
rights recognized by the African Charter. To this end, they are endowed with freedom of
action on their territory.
This study therefore intends to review the status of the States’ undertakings in terms of their
compliance with the African Charter in general and the decisions of the African Commission
on Human and Peoples’ Rights (hereinafter the African Commission) in particular. It shall
reveal, through a few illustrations and in the light of the practices that can be observed in
certain States parties, that, although the different provisions of African Charter have given
rise to considerable normative production (I), enforcement of the decisions handed down by
the Commission is quite limited (II).
I.
The African Charter: an abundant source of normative production
See J.-François Flauss and Elisabeth Lambert-Abdelgawad (eds.), L’application nationale de la Charte
africaine des droits de l’homme et des peuples, Bruylant, Nemesis, 2004.
2
South Sudan, which was officially recognized on 09 July 2011, has ratified the Constitutive Act of the African
Union, but has yet to ratify the African Charter.
3
The Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa entered
into force on 25 November 2005.
1
2
The States parties to the African Charter have not all remained passive in the face of the
obligations arising from the instrument. On the contrary, they have played a ‘proactive’ role
in its normative application, which can take on a variety of legal forms. Significantly, the
States’ practices bring two categories of measures to light: those relating to the domestication
of the African instrument into national law (A) and those relating to the adoption of legislative
or other types of measures (B).
A. National measures for the domestication of the Charter
The purpose of the Charter is to establish obligations for the Contracting States that are aimed
at instituting sweeping protection for human rights. At the national level, States parties
enforce treaties through measures of domestication. In this regard, it should be recognized that
States parties’ domestic mechanisms for human rights promotion and protection play an
important role in the domestication of the African instrument. Indeed, the Charter’s
incorporation into domestic law is key to its implementation in the States. This obligation has
been asserted by the African Commission. In 1989, the African Commission, meeting in its
fifth ordinary session, adopted a resolution on the effective incorporation of the African
Charter into the domestic legal systems of the States parties.4 Subsequently, in 1996, a second
Resolution was adopted during its 19th session,5 stressing the role of lawyers and judges in
the incorporation and application of the Charter. Finally, in the framework of the
recommendations formulated in its concluding observations, the Commission has continued to
speak out in favour of domestication by urging States parties that had yet to do so to
incorporate the African instrument into their domestic systems.6
Overall, the practices of the States parties are not homogeneous, but vary according to their
legal systems. Three possible cases can be observed, according to whether the Contracting
States subscribe to a monistic or dualistic approach or whether they have their own
specificities.
A large number of States parties to the Charter subscribe to a monistic approach, which is to
say that they ‘are prepared to enforce international treaties immediately without requiring a
special procedure for the incorporation of treaties into the domestic legal system’.7 For the
proponents of the monistic approach, the domestication of the African Charter is therefore
automatic upon its ratification by the States. This is the case in most of the Francophone
countries of Africa, where, once the African instrument is duly signed and ratified, it
immediately takes effect upon official publication. However, the Charter’s position in the
hierarchy of norms in domestic law varies from one State to another. While certain monistic
States recognize the African instrument as having supra-constitutional authority, i.e. a rank
above that of their national constitution, others only recognize it as having supra-legislative
status.8
F. Ouguergouz, ‘L’application de la Charte africaine des droits de l’homme et des Peuples par les autorités
nationales de la Charte africaine en Afrique occidentale’, in L’application nationale de la Charte africaine des
droits de l’homme et des peuples, op. cit., p. 173.
5
Res. 22 (XIX) 96: Resolution on the Role of Lawyers and Judges in the Integration of the Charter and the
Enhancement of the Commission’s work in National and sub-Regional systems.
6
Such recommendations were formulated with regard to Zambia and Kenya in the concluding observations.
7
J. Verhoeven, Droit international public, Précis de la Faculté de droit et de l’Université Catholique de Louvain,
Larcier, Brussels, 2000, p. 37. (Our translation)
8
As in Algeria, where Article 132 of the Constitution of 1996 provides that ‘Treaties ratified by the President of
the Republic in accordance with the conditions provided for by the Constitution are superior to the law’.
(Quoted from the official translation found at: http://www.servat.unibe.ch/icl/ag00000_.html) This is also the
case in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), where Article 215 of the Constitution of 2006 states that
4
3
For numerous reasons, the constitutionalization of the rights guaranteed by the African
Charter is a matter of vital interest for the protection of human and peoples’ rights. The first
of these reasons is that, by incorporating the African Charter into the constitution, the
constituent explicitly affirms its will to integrate the Charter’s provisions into the domestic
legal system. The second is that the technique allows judges to cite it in determining
applicable laws and this empowers them to assert the prevalence of the Charter over laws that
contradict it. Finally, the Charter becomes immediately enforceable in the domestic legal
system when the Constitution clearly establishes the primacy of international law over
national norms, whatever their legal status.9
In States that take a dualistic approach, the African Charter, like all other international
treaties, must be systematically incorporated into domestic law. Parliament must not only
authorize the ratification of the treaty, but also translate international laws into domestic laws
in order that the provisions of the treaty may be enforced within the domestic legal system;
the normative effect of international provisions is transmitted from the treaty to the domestic
ratification law.10 In such States, the African Charter has the same value as a national law.11
Alongside the monistic and dualistic systems, there is also another domestication technique
that proceeds through ratification. These States present their own specificities, such as the
absence of a constitution (Libya) or of a judicial system (Somalia) or the prevalence of
religious law (i.e. Sharia). However, the act of ratification binds the State party to comply
with the provisions of the Charter.
B. Adoption of legislative or other measures
The African Charter makes no distinction between the different rights, which are all equally
enforceable. The principle of the indivisibility and independence of all human rights is
effectively recognized by the African instrument. As stipulated by the Preamble: ‘it is
henceforth essential to pay a particular attention to the right to development and […]civil
and political rights cannot be dissociated from economic, social and cultural rights in their
conception as well as universality and […]the satisfaction of economic, social and cultural
rights is a guarantee for the enjoyment of civil and political rights’.12
The reports submitted periodically by the States parties to the African Commission in
compliance with the provisions of Article 62 highlight the diversity of the measures
undertaken by the States to enforce the rights guaranteed by the African Charter. A perusal of
‘Lawfully concluded treaties and agreements have, when published, an authority superior to that of the law,
subject for each treaty and agreement to the application by the other party’. (Quoted as found in English
translation on: http://www.constitutionnet.org/vl/constitution-democratic-republic-congo)
9
J. Verhoeven, ‘La notion d’applicabilité directe du droit international’, Revue Belge du droit international
(R.B.D.I.), 1980, No. 2, p. 243.
10
H. Fourteau, L’application de l’article 3 de la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme dans le droit
interne des Etats membres : l’impact des garanties européennes contre la torture et les traitements inhumains ou
dégradants, L.G.D.J., 1996, p. 18-19.
11
This is the case in: Botswana, Malawi, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe...
12
Preamble to the African Charter, para. 8.
4
these reports shows that many of the States parties have adopted legislative or other types of
measures in keeping with Article 1 of the Charter. These reports state that the adoption of the
Charter has generated significant developments in terms of legislation, regulations or justice
and that changes have been made to the dimensions, structure and content of the basic laws of
certain States parties. It appears that these normative changes are a direct consequence of the
implementation of the Charter. For instance, in its 2nd to 10th Periodic Report submitted in
2006, Tanzania states that ‘some of the principles of the Charter have been incorporated and
therefore domesticated in the following legislations’.13
However, it is important to stress that, although all national legal systems recognize the
Charter, the solutions they use for its enforcement are varied. The implementation of Charter
provisions therefore differs depending on the State.
The measures adopted by the States parties essentially focus on compliance with explicit
obligations that are clearly formulated in the African Charter and the Protocol on the Rights
of Women in Africa. All domestic provisions adopted in the framework of human rights
protection stem from States’ undertakings to adopt legislative measures to give effect to the
Charter. The rights protection objective sought by the African Charter constitutes a means for
legislators to enhance their jurisdiction in terms of legislation on human and peoples’ rights.
The legislators’ jurisdiction notably includes implementation of normative decisions handed
down by the regulatory body, which constitute norms with which they must comply when
drafting new laws.
Resolutions, described as ‘normative’ because they are intended to bring about changes in
domestic law, have sometimes influenced legislators in multiple areas. These specifically
include resolutions on the right to a fair trial and the Resolution on Guidelines and Measures
for the Prohibition and Prevention of Torture, Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment in Africa, which have considerably inspired national legislation. Indeed, many
periodic reports contain information on measures implemented on the national scale. One of
the most pertinent of those was the draft bill on prisons, adopted in 2006, which eliminated
corporal punishment in the prisons of Uganda.14 Similar legislation has been adopted in
Egypt, notably with the adoption of new provisions to meet the requirements of Article 5 of
the Charter.15 In Ethiopia, the Federal Prison Commission Establishment Proclamation
(Proclamation No. 365/2003) states that prisoners have the right to be treated with conditions
of respect for human dignity.16 The same applies in Kenya where, in 1997, the government
enacted a law expressly prohibiting the use of torture by the police to obtain information and
evidence.17
Legal interpretation of all of these material changes, which are increasingly prevalent, points
to the conclusion that the African Charter has become a normative reference in terms of
13
Specifically, the following legislation: Penal Code CAP. 16 R.E. 2002 (on the protection of the child against
exploitation and abuse); Criminal Procedure Act CAP.20 R.E. 2002 (on the protection of the child in cases of
conflict with the law); Evidence Act CAP. 6 R.E. 2002 (on the protection of child witnesses); Sexual Offences
Act (SOSPA) Cap. 101 R.E. 2002. See: 2nd-10th consolidated report submitted by the Republic of Tanzania, p.4.
14
Periodic Report of Uganda presented at the 39th ordinary session of the African Commission in May 2006, p.
106.
15
7th and 8th Periodic Reports of Egypt submitted to the Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights for the
period running from 2001 to 2004.
16
Combined report (four reports - initial and periodical) by Ethiopia to the African Commission, p. 22-23, para.
75-77.
17
1st report by Kenya, submitted in 2006, p. 10, para. 34-35.
5
human rights in Africa. That said, the implementation of the Charter cannot be reduced solely
to the adoption of constitutional or legislative provisions, which have been shown, in some
regards, to be insufficient to enable individuals to fully enjoy the rights enshrined in the
Charter. In fact, a study of the implementation of the African Charter reveals a striking
paradox: a divide between the ambition of the texts and the failings in their implementation,
and even limited results in terms of the implementation of the decisions of the Commission.
II.
Limited implementation of the decisions of the African Commission
Within the framework of the African system, the obligation of compliance with the decisions
of the African Commission arises from the obligation contained in Article 1 of the African
Charter which obliges States parties to adopt all necessary measures to give effect to the
rights, duties and freedoms enshrined in the Charter.18 Similarly, the African Commission
considers that the ratification of the Charter implies an undertaking to ‘cooperate with the
[African] Commission and to abide by all decisions taken by the latter’.19 In other words, it is
up to the national authorities to implement the decisions of the African Commission.
Similarly, the resolution on the importance of implementing the recommendations of the
African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights by States parties establishes that ‘State
Parties in ratifying without any reservation, the African Charter on Human and Peoples'
Rights have thus agreed to accept the authority and the essential role of the Commission in
the promotion and protection of Human and Peoples' Rights throughout Africa’ and,
accordingly, the Commission ‘CALLS UPON all state parties to the African Charter on
Human and Peoples' Rights to respect without delay the recommendations of the
Commission’. Consequently, as compliance with its decisions was considered a corollary to
recognition of the Commission’s jurisdiction, States parties were bound to comply pursuant to
their conventional undertaking. This meant that States parties had very specific obligations in
relation to the domestic authorities.
However, it behoves us to note that the practical implementation of the decisions of the
Commission by the States parties has been relatively sketchy depending on whether it takes
place in the context of a dispute (B) or not (A).
A. Partial implementation of ‘decisions’ not relating to disputes
By drafting resolutions and concluding observations, the Commission respectively helps to
compensate for gaps left by the Charter and draws attention to the insufficiencies that can be
seen in many periodic reports. Resolutions and concluding observations may also be
considered a major source of interpretation of the provisions of the African Charter, which
confers on them a particular authority. Notwithstanding the fact that such ‘decisions’ have no
binding effect, ‘these interpretations can be backed up by the objective nature of human
rights. As the human person is at the heart of the concerns of the supranational bodies, it is
Article 1 of the African Charter ‘The Member States of the Organization of African Unity parties to the
present Charter shall recognize the rights, duties and freedoms enshrined in this Chapter and shall undertake to
adopt legislative or other measures to give effect to them.’
19
Communication 227/99, Democratic Republic of Congo v./ Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, 20th Annual Activity
Report, para. 53.
18
6
difficult to imagine the States (…) refusing to draw on the interpretations provided’. It can
therefore be affirmed that these interpretations can, like the observations, benefit from an
obligation of compliance to the extent that the States have an obligation of results. Thus, the
interpretative authority can be reinforced and can lead States to adopt the necessary measures.
Although the African Commission has devoted considerable normative efforts to this area,
adopting 183 resolutions in 25 years of activity–including an estimated 20 so-called
‘normative’ resolutions–in practice, only a handful of normative resolutions have had positive
impact on domestic laws. Specifically, the protection of vulnerable persons and the fight
against the HIV pandemic are the areas where governments have undertaken the most
concrete actions. For instance, in order to comply with the Resolution of the Commission on
the HIV/AIDS pandemic,20 the Zambian21 and Cameroonian22 governments have developed
national policies on the fight against AIDS. Similarly, the resolutions of the Commission on
the death penalty have led to positive results in Benin. In its first step, the Beninese
government stated that, ‘In a bid to implement the resolution of the African Commission on
Human and Peoples’ Rights and to give effect to the commitments made by Benin with respect
to the right to life, the Government has initiated a debate on whether to abolish or maintain
the death penalty. In fact, the eighth session of the National Human Rights Consultative
Council, held from 23 to 25 February, 2004 in Cotonou was the forum for such debate.’23
Subsequently, the Beninese government effectively ratified the Second Optional Protocol to
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, on the abolition of capital
punishment, on 18 August 2011, thereby joining Africa’s 16 other abolitionist States. In
another example, countries such as South Africa, Senegal and Benin24 celebrate African
Human Rights Day on 21st October of each year25 in compliance with the very first resolution
adopted by the Banjul-based body.
Finally, it is important to mention the institutional changes that have taken place in most of
the countries through the establishment of National Human Rights Institutions (hereinafter
NHRIs)26 or human rights ministries or directorates intended to give effect to the Resolution
on the Establishment of Committees on Human Rights or other Similar Organs at National,
Regional or Sub-Regional Levels.27
Res. 53 (XXIX) 01: Resolution on HIV/AIDS Pandemic – Threat Against Human Rights and Humanity
(2001). Many governments faced with high HIV prevalence rates have set up programmes to fight the pandemic,
which has been a devastating scourge in Africa.
21
See the initial report by Zambia to the Commission p. 57 et seq., para. 141-152.
22
See the second Periodic Report of Cameroon, p. 80, para. 206-209.
23
Periodic Report of Benin on the Implementation of the African Charter, p. 8.
24
G. Baricako, ‘La mise en œuvre des décisions de la Commission africaine des droits de l’homme et des
peuples’, in L’application nationale de la Charte africaine des droits de l’homme et des peuples, op. cit., p. 212.
25
Res. 1(V) 89: Resolution on the Celebration of an African Day of Human Rights (1989).
26
To date, the Commission has granted affiliate status to 22 NHRIs. These are: National Human Rights
Commission of Mauritania, National Human Rights Commission of Mali, National Commission of Human
Rights and Freedoms in Cameroon, Uganda Human Rights Commission, Ethiopian Human Rights Commission,
National Human Rights Committee of Cameroon, Senegalese Human Rights Committee, National Commission
for Human Rights of Rwanda, Chad National Human Rights Commission, National Human Rights Commission
(Togo), National Commission on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Niger), Malawi National Human
Rights Commission, National Commission for Democracy and Human Rights (Sierra Leone), National Human
Rights Commission (Nigeria), National Human Rights Commission of Mauritius, South African Human Rights
Commission, Democratic Republic of the Congo National Human Rights Observatory; Kenya National
Commission on Human Rights, National Advisory Commission for the Promotion and Protection of Human
Rights (Algeria), Permanent Human Rights Commission of Zambia, Commission for Human Rights and Good
Governance of Tanzania, and National Human Rights Commission of Burkina Faso.
27
Res.2(V)89: Resolution on the Establishment of Committees on Human Rights or other Similar Organs at
National, Regional or Sub-Regional Levels (1989).
20
7
Concluding observations, for their part, arise from an evaluation based on a comparison of
legislation and domestic practices with the requirements of the Charter. By adopting these
observations, the Commission seeks to deal with certain gaps in terms of application
identified in its reviews of State reports. In its observations, the Commission urges States to
adopt appropriate behaviours.
In practice, the Commission has formulated some 72 concluding observations aimed at 37
States parties. With the exceptions of Cameroon,28 Uganda,29 Rwanda30 and the Democratic
Republic of the Congo,31 the majority of States parties have failed to comply with the
observations formulated by the African Commission.
B. Low impact of recommendations issued on disputes
The disputes mandate of the Commission implies that it hands down rulings in law on alleged
violations of the African Charter. Generally, after finding a violation, the Commission issues
recommendations informing the accused State of appropriate measures to remedy said
violation. A concern with ensuring proper compliance with finding decisions has led the
control body to adopt decisions couched in firm language, which read like actual injunctions
since they order specific measures. They essentially comprise obligations of cessation, nonrepetition and reparation.
Given that the States parties are bound by the Charter provisions, they are also bound by the
case law of the Commission since ‘Under the Charter, therefore, States Parties are not given
the option of recognising the substantive rights without accepting the jurisdiction of the
African Commission, which was established to promote and protect those rights’.32 In other
words, States found to be in violation of the Charter are subject to a general obligation to
comply with any decisions handed down.
Although the Commission has developed a dynamic and constructive body of case law on
human and peoples’ rights over the last 25 years, it remains that the impact of its decisions on
domestic legal systems is insignificant. Since its establishment, more than 400 cases have
been submitted to the Commission. The Commission has reported 73 violations of the Charter
involving 44 States parties. And yet, a very limited number of States have complied with its
recommendations.
28
According to the concluding observations, Cameroon was: to reinforce its policy on free, mandatory and
universal access to basic education, with a view to eliminating gender discrimination; to review its prison
conditions with a view to ensuring compliance with the principles of the Charter and international standards; to
continue to work in close collaboration with NGOs so that the rights enshrined in the African Charter became a
reality for all citizens; to continue promoting a culture of respect for human rights in order to reduce existing
tensions between Anglophones and Francophones within Cameroonian society and promote the peaceful
coexistence of the various ethnic groups in the country; to ratify as soon as possible, the protocol on the
establishment of the African Court; to inform the African Commission, in its next periodic report, of the progress
achieved in relation to the aforementioned areas of concern.
29
2nd periodic report of Uganda to the African Commission submitted at the 44th ordinary session in Abuja,
Federal Republic of Nigeria, 10-24 November 2008.
30
See the 9th and 10th periodic reports of Rwanda, op. cit., p. 14-24.
31
8th, 9th and 10th periodic report of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
32
313/05: Kenneth Good v./ Republic of Botswana, para.78.
8
These States have indeed adopted individual and general measures to comply with the
Commission’s recommendations. For example, in keeping with such recommendations,
Sierra Leone modified its legislation to comply with decision 223/98 Forum of conscience v.
Sierra Leone; Law No. 34 of 1961 governing the armed forces of the Republic of Sierra
Leone was amended by the law of July 2000. The new law revoked Article 129 and
introduced new provisions governing Court Martial in Sierra Leone.33 Furthermore, in terms
of implementation, the example of Mauritania in Malawi African Association and Others v.
Mauritania34 remains a reference, since the Mauritanian authorities implemented virtually all
of the recommendations of the Commission35.
In terms of individual measures, some of the States against which communications have been
directed have also implemented the Commission’s recommendations, so that certain victims
have been freed36 and others have been compensated.37
The new regulatory provisions have marked a step forward in this area, since they help
increase the efficiency of the African mechanism for the protection of human rights. Indeed,
the implementation of follow-up procedures on concluding observations (Article 78 of the
Rules of Procedure) and recommendations (Article 112 of the Rules of Procedure) represents
considerable progress, which may be decisive for the implementation of the African Charter.
Furthermore, the involvement of the African Court and other African Union bodies, namely
the Peace and Security Council (P.S.C.), the Assembly and the Commission, in the control
procedure consolidates the African protection mechanism and contributes to its
development.38
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, it must be recognized that Africa is far from having achieved an ideal
protection system along the lines of the European or Inter-American mechanisms. Indeed,
there is a considerable gap between the normative structure and effective implementation of
the rights guaranteed by the African Charter. Furthermore, the complexities surrounding the
issue of implementation of the decisions of the Commission can raise legitimate questions
over the status of the legal controls carried out by other regional mechanisms notably the
Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States (E.C.O.W.A.S.) and the
Court of Justice of the East African Community (E.A.C.), which generally base their
33
The new article 129 provides for channels for appeal in court martial cases. See the site: http://www.sierraleone.org/Laws/2000-13.pdf.
34
Communications 54/91, 61/91, 98/93, 164-196/97 and 210/98, Malawi African Association, Amnesty
International, Mme Sarr Diop, Union Interafricaine des Droits de l’Homme et RADDHO, Collectif des Veuves et
Ayants-droit et Association Mauritanienne des Droits de l’Homme v. Mauritania, 13th Annual Activity Report.
35
Statement made by the Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa (IHRDA) and Forum des
Organisations Nationales des Droits de l’Homme (FONADH) during the 46th ordinary session of the African
Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 11-25 November 2009, Banjul, The Gambia.
36
As in the case of Constitutional Rights Project (in respect of Wahab Akamu, G. Adega and others) v./ Nigeria
where one hundred suspects were condemned to the death penalty in application of Decree No. 5 of 1984 known
as ‘Robbery and Firearms (Special Provision)’. The Commission ‘recommended’ that the government of Nigeria
free the complainants. With a view to compliance with this recommendation, the Nigerian authorities first
commuted the death sentence to a sentence of life in prison, and subsequently freed all of the suspects.
37
Cameroon complied with a decision handed down by the Commission in Communication 59/91 Emgba
Mekongo Louis v. Cameroon. The victim was awarded compensation for the prejudice suffered and his rights
were fully restored.
38
See the new regulatory provisions: notably articles 79, 84 (1), 84 (2) and 118 of the Rules of Procedure of
2010.
9
decisions on the African Charter. Multiple judicial bodies are involved in the enforcement of
the African Charter. Due to the scattered nature of their response, these dynamics are ill
designed to promote the harmonization of solutions on the regional scale. In such a context,
the courts should aim for overall consistency in their decisions to avoid contradictions
between their different solutions, whose focus should be to enhance the level of protection of
human rights in Africa.
In order to achieve this, it is essential for all States parties to the African Charter, with support
from the political organs of the A.U., to equip the control bodies with the means to launch a
‘new era’ of development for human rights in Africa. We can only hope that, in future, the
States parties and the A.U. will be more receptive to the influences and requirements of
international law in the enforcement of human rights.
10