The Applicant alleges the Decree-Law No. 11 of 2022 to establish a new Provisional Supreme Judicial Council in lieu of the elected Supreme Judiciary Council which was regulated by Law No. 34 of 2016 of 28 April 2016 violates ...

In conformity with Rule 69(3) of the Rules, and in implementation of the operative part of its judgment on merits, the Parties filed their submissions on reparations within the times permitted by the Court.

On 16 August 2019, the Applicant filed his written submissions, praying the Court to award him reparations based on its findings in the judgment on the merits

The Applicant alleges that the conduct of the Respondent State constitutes a violation of the rights to equal protection before the law, and to have one’s cause heard protected under Articles 3(1), and 7(1) of the Charter; ...

The Court reiterates that parties to an application should pursue their case with diligence. Where they fail or implicitly or expressly indicate their lack of interest to do so, Rule 65 of the Rules empowers the Court to ...

The Applicant filed the Application at this Court alleging that the proceedings in the domestic courts violated his rights as guaranteed in the Charter, namely, the right to a fair trial (Article 7), the right to dignity ...

The Applicants allege the violation of the following: i) The right to equality before the law and the right to equal protection of the law, protected by Article 3(1) and (2) of the Charter and Article 26 of the International ...

The Applicants allege a violation of the following rights: i. the right to a fair trial, protected by Article 7(2) of the Charter; ii. the right to property, protected by Article 14 of the Charter;

In the instant case, the Court considers that it is appropriate, in the interest of justice and respect for the principle of adversarial proceedings, to adjourn the proceedings and order the reopening of the hearing in ...

The Court concludes that Applicant has failed to pursue his case within the meaning of Rule 65 (1) (b) of the Rules and thus, the Court decides to strike out the instant Application from its Cause List.