The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights has delivered its judgment in the legal matter involving Alex Thomas versus the United Republic of Tanzania where the applicant’s case was dismissed.
In the Application 005/2013) the Applicant, Mr Alex Thomas who was convicted in absentia for armed robbery in 1998 and is currently serving sentence of 30 years imprisonment in Tanzania had filed an Application before the African Court alleging that he was wrongfully convicted and that the trial and appellate Courts in Tanzania lacked jurisdiction to try him as the robbery occurred in Kenya.
The applicant further alleged that he was not given an opportunity to defend himself during trial, that the prosecution did not prove the case against him beyond reasonable doubt; that he was not provided with legal aid during trial contrary to the Constitution of Tanzania and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and that there had been unduly delay in the review of the decision of the Court of appeal where he appealed in 2009.
Represented by Pan African Lawyers Union (PALU), the applicant prayed for the following reliefs from the Court; A declaration that the Applicant’s state violated the Applicant’s rights as enshrined under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights Articles 1 (recognition by State parties of the rights, duties and freedom under the African Charter)
The applicant also prayed for Article 3 (Equality before the law and equal protection of the law); Article 5 (Right to respect of the dignity inherent in a human being); Article 6 (Right to liberty); Article 7(1) (Right to have one’s cause heard) and Article 9(1) (Right to receive information).
He requested an Order of release of the Applicant by the state Respondent, an order of reparations an order to compel the Respondent’s state to report to the African Court on the implementation of the Court’s decision after every 6 months and any other order that the Court may deem fit.
The Respondent state on the other hand raised preliminary objections on jurisdiction, admissibility and merits. With regards to admissibility, the Respondent prayed that the Court grants the orders that the application be dismissed for lack of admissibility requirements as stipulated under the Rules of the Court, the Charter and the Protocol and that the application be dismissed in accordance with Rule 38 of the Rules of the Court (Dismissal of applications without merit).
SOURCE:DAILY NEWS:African Court dismisses robbery ruling
Leave a Reply