|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| January 2026 |
|
|
ECOWAS Court found jurisdiction and admissibility to hear alleged unlawful arrest, torture and malicious prosecution by a Member State.
Jurisdiction – ECOWAS Court – Article 9(4) – allegation of human rights violation sufficient; Admissibility – Article 10(d) – not manifestly inadmissible; Alleged violations – unlawful arrest, torture, degrading treatment, malicious prosecution; Procedure – merits to be heard; costs reserved.
|
30 January 2026 |
|
The applicant proved disputed ownership, prompting the Court to strike property-finding portions of the prior judgment.
Third-party proceedings (Art.91 Rules) – Admissibility and time-limit – Jurisdiction to vary prior judgment – Ownership dispute of mobile turbine power stations – Human-rights protection versus private commercial dispute – Amendment/striking out of property-finding and reparations in earlier judgment.
|
30 January 2026 |
|
Dismissals unlawful for failure to follow ECOWAS Staff Regulations' due process; Court's jurisdiction limited to public-service claims.
Jurisdiction — Community public-service jurisdiction v. human-rights jurisdiction; Admissibility — exhaustion of internal remedies under Article 73(b) of ECOWAS Staff Regulations; Due process in disciplinary proceedings — requirement of written notification of charges, constitution of an independent disciplinary committee, adherence to timelines and reporting obligations (Articles 92–95); Duty to give a reasoned decision and proportionality of sanctions; Remedies — reinstatement or salary in lieu, arrears, moral and material damages, record expungement, and costs.
|
30 January 2026 |
|
Court finds jurisdiction and admissibility, rejects torture claim but finds violation of right to physical integrity and awards CFA 10,000,000.
Human rights jurisdiction — ECOWAS Court competence; admissibility — no requirement to exhaust domestic remedies; victim status; torture threshold requires specific intent/purpose; right to physical integrity (ACHPR Article 4); compensation for bodily injury.
|
29 January 2026 |
|
Court dismissed torture claim but found State liable for violation of applicant's physical integrity and awarded damages.
Human rights jurisdiction — admissibility (no exhaustion requirement) — victim status — distinction between torture/cruel treatment and unlawful use of force — violation of physical integrity — compensation awarded.
|
26 January 2026 |
