Amnesty International has recently called upon African Union member states to bolster their political, legal, and financial backing for the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights. This appeal comes during the court’s 20th anniversary, emphasizing the crucial role that this judicial body plays in upholding human rights across Africa. According to Japhet Biegon, deputy regional director for East and Southern Africa at Amnesty International, the court remains an indispensable avenue for individuals and civil society organizations unable to find suitable remedies in their national jurisdictions. Despite challenges, the African Court has developed significant jurisprudence, addressing a spectrum of human rights issues and expanding protection for people across the continent. More details can be found here.
Established in 2006, the African Court was created to hold jurisdiction over binding decisions on human rights violations, a major advancement from the previous role of the African Commission. The court’s inception was seen as a milestone for African sovereignty, particularly given the continent’s colonial history. The establishment of the court was celebrated for providing a localized judicial mechanism that aligns with the realities of modern Africa without relying on external international entities.
Operating on a hybrid legal system, the African Court integrates international human rights treaties with the domestic laws of African nations. This approach allows the court to address unique geopolitical challenges faced by the continent. Over the years, the court has completed more than 250 cases, covering issues such as fair trial rights and protections against torture. Yet, the full potential of the court remains hindered as only 34 of the 55 African Union states have ratified its founding protocol, and a mere seven have authorized individuals and organizations to submit cases directly.
Despite its impactful judgments, such as the protection of journalists in Norbert Zongo & Others v. Burkina Faso and the ruling against arbitrary nationality deprivation in Léonce Munyarugerero Anudo v. United Republic of Tanzania, the implementation of its decisions often falls short. The lack of comprehensive ratification and restricted access for individuals and organizations remain substantial obstacles to the court’s wider acceptance and efficacy. Additional context about the court’s contributions and challenges is available here.
As the African Court continues its mission to safeguard human rights, increased support from member states could significantly enhance its ability to effect change across the continent. The actions taken now could set a precedent for strengthened regional judicial mechanisms that reflect Africa’s legal and cultural landscapes.