|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| July 2024 |
|
|
|
10 July 2024 |
|
Applicant's allegations of unfair trial, bias and loss of property from administrative revision were dismissed for lack of evidence.
• Human rights jurisdiction – ECOWAS Court competence to hear alleged state violations; • Fair trial – equality of arms, public hearing and document-based administrative procedure; • Judicial impartiality – requirement of material and unequivocal evidence to establish bias; • Legal certainty/res judicata – revision procedure permissible where law provides; • Property rights – distinction between allocation letter/use and ACD (final title); • Remedies – damages only when a human-rights violation is established.
|
10 July 2024 |
|
Summary dismissal breached ECOWAS Staff Regulations; appeal suspends sanctions and salary cessation was unlawful.
Employment law – ECOWAS Staff Regulations – disciplinary procedure – adequacy and specificity of queries; right to fair hearing – Article 69 breaches; appeals under Article 73(b) suspend all sanctions including cessation of salaries; remedies: declaratory relief, payment of arrears and compensation; reinstatement and injunctions declined.
|
10 July 2024 |
|
Court found breaches of security, torture prohibition and assembly/expression rights; ordered compensation and fresh investigations.
Human rights — Jurisdiction and admissibility of human-rights claims; Protest and crowd control — legality, necessity and proportionality of use of force by State agents; Right to security of the person (Art.6 ACHPR); Prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment (Art.5 ACHPR); Freedoms of expression, assembly and association (Arts.9–11 ACHPR); State duty to investigate and provide effective remedy; Reparations and compensation.
|
10 July 2024 |
|
Court found jurisdiction and admissibility but dismissed gas‑flaring human‑rights claims for lack of evidential proof.
Human‑rights jurisdiction; actio popularis and NGO standing; admissibility and pendency; environmental harm and burden of proof; causation in state responsibility for gas flaring; unchallenged evidence accepted.
|
4 July 2024 |
| June 2024 |
|
|
Retroactive application of a ministerial disciplinary order violated the applicant's right to a fair hearing under Article 7(2).
Human rights — Administrative discipline — Civil aviation regulatory action attributable to State; Jurisdiction under Article 9(4) of the Court's Protocol; Admissibility under Article 10(d); Equality and non-discrimination (Article 3 African Charter) — burden to prove unjustified selective treatment; Fair hearing (Article 7 African Charter) — prohibition of retroactive penalisation; Ministerial Order No. 033/2021/MTRAF applied retroactively; Right to work (Article 15 African Charter & ICESCR Article 6(1)) — causation and state responsibility for dismissal; Reparations — expungement and general damages.
|
6 June 2024 |
|
Application dismissed as inadmissible because applicant failed to prove familial relationship and thus lacked standing.
Human rights — Admissibility — Locus standi — Victim status (direct and indirect) — Proof of family relationship required to establish standing — ECOWAS Court jurisdiction to hear alleged violations by Member States.
|
6 June 2024 |
|
An NGO lacked locus standi to sue for a property right over funds belonging to its founder; claim declared inadmissible.
Human rights — Right to property (Article 14 ACHPR) — Locus standi and admissibility — Distinction between human rights violations and contractual/tortious banking disputes — Jurisdiction of ECOWAS Community Court under Article 9(4) — Consumer protection complaints vis-à-vis victim status.
|
6 June 2024 |
|
Delay in presidential signing of land deeds did not amount to state violation of property rights absent title or proven notice.
* Human rights jurisdiction – Court jurisdiction to hear alleged violations occurring in Member State; corporate applicants' standing (Dexter Oil exception) for property claims; * Property law – Tribal land certificates vs. formal title under Liberian Public Lands Law (§30, §52); title vests only upon completion of formalities and President's signed deed; * State responsibility – private actors' actions not attributable to State absent notice and failure to act; burden to prove notification; * Remedies – claims for specific performance and compensation dismissed where no violation found.
|
6 June 2024 |
|
Court refused to order enforcement and found interpretation request inadmissible for lack of specified ambiguous passages.
* ECOWAS Court jurisdiction – Interpretation of judgments under Article 23 – limited to clarifying meaning, not enforcement
* Enforcement – Execution of ECOWAS Court decisions is the responsibility of Member States/national competent authorities (2005 Additional Protocol, Article 24)
* Admissibility – Applications for interpretation must specify the operative provisions/words/phrases in doubt (Article 95 and case law)
* Default proceedings – Court must verify jurisdiction, admissibility and evidence before granting default relief
* Expedited procedure – granted only where particular urgency is demonstrated (Article 59)
|
6 June 2024 |
|
The Court lacks jurisdiction to order enforcement of its own judgments; enforcement follows prescribed national procedures.
* ECOWAS Court judgments – Enforcement – Article 24, Supplementary Protocol (A/SP.1/01/05) – writ of execution issued by Chief Registrar and enforcement under national procedure.
* Jurisdiction/competence – Court lacks authority to adjudicate enforcement of its own judgments.
* Locus standi – Individuals cannot directly litigate Member State non-compliance before the Court; recourse to national authorities or President of ECOWAS Commission under Supplementary Act on Sanctions (2012).
* Treaty obligation – Article 15(4) Revised ECOWAS Treaty: Member States bound to comply with Court decisions.
|
6 June 2024 |
|
Domestic military immunity cannot oust ECOWAS Court jurisdiction; exhaustion of local remedies is not required.
Human rights — Right to life (Article 4 African Charter) — Alleged extrajudicial killing by military personnel; Jurisdiction — Domestic military immunity (Section 239 Armed Forces Act) cannot oust international obligations; ECOWAS Community Court competence (Article 9(4)); Non-exhaustion of local remedies is not a bar to access (Articles 9(4), 10(d) Supplementary Protocol).
|
6 June 2024 |
| May 2024 |
|
|
The NGO lacked standing and the Court lacked temporal jurisdiction for some killings, so the application was dismissed as inadmissible.
Jurisdiction ratione temporis – non-retroactivity of the 2005 Additional Protocol; distinction between instantaneous and continuing human-rights violations; admissibility – NGO standing, actio popularis versus representative action, requirement of mandates/authorisation for claims on behalf of identified victims; failure to reach merits where jurisdiction or admissibility defects exist.
|
30 May 2024 |
|
Revision denied because applicants were negligent in discovering supposedly "new" criminal charges against the respondent.
Revision of judgment – Article 25 Protocol and Articles 92–93 Rules – requirements: timely filing, discovery of unknown facts, decisiveness, ignorance not due to negligence; diligence expected of applicants who initiated investigation; Staff Regulation Article 68 not applicable to events after termination.
|
30 May 2024 |
|
State’s summary annulment of authorizations violated a company’s property rights and caused undue judicial delay.
• International jurisdiction – ECOWAS Court – signature, provisional application and entry into force of Protocol A/SP.1/01/05 – State domestic law cannot negate international obligations.
• Admissibility – legal persons may sue for protection of property and related fundamental rights; shareholders’ reflective losses inadmissible unless distinct personal rights shown.
• Parties – only Member States/ECOWAS institutions are proper defendants for human-rights claims; individuals and private associations excluded.
• Human rights – arbitrary annulment of administrative authorizations violated Article 14 (right to property); undue delay in domestic proceedings violated right to a decision within a reasonable time (Article 7(1)(d)).
• Remedies – speculative future losses not awarded; equitable compensation and costs awarded against the State.
|
29 May 2024 |
| February 2024 |
|
|
State liable for unjustified police shooting: violations of security, torture and denial of effective remedy.
Human rights — Use of force by law enforcement — Live ammunition fired into crowd — Right to security of the person; Torture — deliberate, severe ill‑treatment by state agents — Convention against Torture; Right to effective remedy — obligation to promptly investigate, prosecute and provide redress; Reparations — compensation, medical costs, investigation and non‑repetition measures.
|
28 February 2024 |
| January 2024 |
|
|
Employment challenge dismissed as statute-barred; national human-rights claims not maintainable against ECOWAS institution.
* ECOWAS Community Court – Jurisdiction – Actions against Community Institutions – Three-year limitation under Article 9(3) of the Supplementary Protocol – time-barred claims.
* Human rights – Claims based on a Member State’s Constitution – Not maintainable against ECOWAS Institutions before the Community Court.
* Internal remedies and parties – Requirement to observe internal appeal procedures and proper defendants (institution vs. office-holder).
|
30 January 2024 |
| December 2023 |
|
|
Court found no human-rights violation where national judgment did not concern the applicant and denied witness compulsion.
Human rights – Fair trial rights – Allegation of trial and conviction in absentia – Admissibility/standing where identity of convicted person disputed – Refusal to compel national official as witness – No proven violation where domestic judgment did not concern applicant.
|
11 December 2023 |
|
An individual lacks standing to sue for specific victims without authorization; actio‑popularis allowed only under strict conditions.
Human rights – Jurisdiction under the ECOWAS Supplementary Protocol; Standing/locus standi – individual cannot litigate for a deceased victim without authorization; Actio‑popularis – permitted for indeterminable groups only where (1) right is public, (2) reliefs are exclusively public, and (3) victims can be reasonably envisaged; pleading clarity required for envisaging victims; reparations unavailable where application inadmissible.
|
7 December 2023 |
| November 2023 |
|
|
Age, accreditation and training requirements for journalists violate freedom of expression; arrests were not shown unlawful.
* Jurisdiction – Community Court may examine national laws to the extent required to determine specific alleged violations of the African Charter. * Freedom of expression – compulsory accreditation, age and educational prerequisites for journalists restrict Article 9 rights; online and citizen journalism protected. * Non-discrimination – claimant must prove differential treatment in similar cases to establish Article 2 breach. * Liberty – arrests/detention examined for lawfulness; evidential burden on claimant. * Remedies – declarations and order to amend national law; no automatic award of damages.
|
24 November 2023 |
|
A political party can sue for corporate rights (property, fair hearing); the Court may review national decisions only for procedural human-rights defects.
* Human rights – Access to Court – Corporate entities (political parties) may sue for rights fundamental to corporate existence (property, fair hearing).
* Jurisdiction – ECOWAS Court may inquire into procedural human-rights safeguards in national court proceedings but will not act as an appellate court.
* Admissibility – Applicant produced internal authorization; application complies with Article 10(d) of the Supplementary Protocol.
* Merits – No violation of Article 7 (fair hearing) or Article 14 (property) as Applicant had no proprietary interest after MoU validated by national court.
|
24 November 2023 |
|
ECOWAS Court found jurisdiction and urgency but held national procedures lawful, dismissed rights violations and awarded costs to the respondent.
* Human rights jurisdiction – ECOWAS Court jurisdiction under Supplementary Protocol A/SP.1/01/05 to hear alleged violations by Member States. * Standing – political party leader’s locus standi despite contested dissolution. * Expedited procedure – admissibility where electoral deadlines create urgency. * Interim measures – mootness where judgment imminent or national remedies pending. * Merits – no breach found where national criminal and administrative procedures complied with domestic law. * Non‑interference – ECOWAS Court will not review national courts’ decisions or substitute its assessment absent proven international law violations.
|
17 November 2023 |
| October 2023 |
|
|
State‑ordered internet and social‑media blocks violated NGOs' rights to information and freedom of expression, absent lawful justification.
Internet shutdowns – Freedom of expression and right to information – ICCPR Article 19 and ACHPR Article 9 – Legality, legitimacy, necessity and proportionality of restrictions – Standing of legal persons (NGOs) – Default judgment – Reparations require quantified loss.
|
31 October 2023 |
| April 2022 |
|
|
Pre-trial detention exceeding statutory limits violated rights to liberty and timely trial; Court ordered release and compensation.
* Human rights — Jurisdiction of ECOWAS Court to examine alleged violations arising from national criminal proceedings and judicial decisions.
* Criminal procedure — Pre-trial detention — Statutory limits in counter-terrorism cases — Detention beyond four years held arbitrary and unlawful.
* Fair trial — Right to be tried within a reasonable time — Excessive delay and prolonged pre-trial detention violate Articles 7(1)(d) ACHPR and Articles 9 and 14 ICCPR.
* Presumption of innocence and non-discrimination — No violation found on facts presented.
* Remedies — Immediate release, compensation, costs and reporting obligation.
|
1 April 2022 |
| March 2022 |
|
|
An indefinite, overbroad ministerial ban on political demonstrations violated the people’s rights to assemble and express themselves; repeal ordered.
Human rights — Freedom of assembly and expression — Ministerial ban on political demonstrations — NGOs’ standing for representative public-interest litigation — admissibility and locus standi — indefinite, overbroad restriction incompatible with African Charter — repeal ordered; monetary compensation denied for indeterminate victims.
|
31 March 2022 |
|
An indefinite, vague ban on political demonstrations violated the Senegalese people’s rights to assembly and expression; monetary compensation declined.
• Human rights – freedom of assembly and peaceful demonstration – ministerial ban in urban perimeter – overbroad, vague and indefinite restrictions unlawful. • Freedom of expression – link with assembly – representative standing of NGOs to sue on behalf of the public; limited capacity of legal persons to claim certain rights. • Freedom of movement – not engaged where ordinary movement and access are not curtailed. • Remedies – repeal of unlawful administrative order; monetary compensation declined where victims are indeterminate; compliance reporting.
|
31 March 2022 |
|
Court lacked temporal jurisdiction to hear pre‑2005 instantaneous human‑rights violations and rejected the application.
Jurisdiction—rationale temporis—2005 Additional Protocol; Non‑retroactivity of treaty jurisdiction (Vienna Convention); Distinction between instantaneous and continuous human‑rights violations; Temporal limitation of ECOWAS Court human‑rights jurisdiction; Admissibility versus jurisdiction—exhaustion of domestic remedies.
|
30 March 2022 |
|
Court dismissed anticipatory freedom-of-expression challenge to a draft hate-speech bill for lack of evidence of imminent violation.
Human rights – Freedom of expression – Anticipatory challenge to draft legislation – Jurisdiction to prevent imminent violations – Burden of proof and requirement to produce certified copy of bill and parliamentary records – Proportionality of restrictions under Article 27(2) African Charter; ICCPR Article 19.
|
29 March 2022 |
|
ECOWAS Court found jurisdiction and no time-bar but dismissed NGO's suit for lack of mandate to represent living inmates.
* Human rights jurisdiction – Article 9(4) Protocol – Court competent to hear alleged human-rights violations by Member States.
* Review of domestic judgments – Court cannot sit as an appellate court but may examine national decisions where human-rights violations are alleged in domestic proceedings.
* Limitation period – Three-year bar disapplied; human-rights claims not time-barred (French text and jurisprudence).
* Admissibility – Representative actions require mandate; NGO lacked authorization to represent living inmates; application inadmissible.
* Costs – Each party to bear own costs.
|
29 March 2022 |
|
An NGO must show a mandate to represent living victims; lack of mandate renders the application inadmissible.
Human rights – Jurisdiction of ECOWAS Court – Admissibility – Locus standi and mandate to act for representative actions – NGOs and public-interest litigation – Exceptions where victims are deceased or incapacitated – Death-row conditions allegations.
|
29 March 2022 |
|
Anticipatory challenge to a draft hate-speech law dismissed for failure to prove imminent violation of freedom of expression.
Freedom of expression — anticipatory challenge to draft hate-speech legislation; jurisdiction to prevent imminent human-rights violations; admissibility of preventive relief; burden and standard of proof for demonstrating reasonable and convincing indices of probable future violation; evidentiary requirement to produce certified bill/Hansard.
|
29 March 2022 |
|
Court ordered ECOWAS to pay unpaid resettlement and separation allowances; damages claims dismissed; default interest awarded.
* ECOWAS Staff Regulations – Articles 35(b), 35(d), 62(c) – entitlement to resettlement and separation allowances upon termination of fixed‑term contracts.
* Jurisdiction and admissibility – Court competence over disputes between Community and officials; exhaustion of internal remedies.
* Accrued leave – burden of proof on applicant to establish miscalculation.
* Damages – applicants must specify and prove material/moral loss; generic claims dismissed.
* Default interest – ordered at EBID savings rate from 30 days after service until payment.
* Costs and compliance reporting – respondent ordered to bear costs and to report implementation within two months.
|
28 March 2022 |
|
Court finds applicants entitled to staff resettlement and separation allowances; orders payment with default interest and costs.
• Administrative law – Staff disputes – Jurisdiction of ECOWAS Court over disputes between Community and its officials.
• Employment law – Fixed-term contracts – Entitlement to resettlement and separation allowances under Staff Regulations (Arts 35(b), 35(d), 62(c)).
• Evidence – Defendant in default; burden of proof and effect of non-appearance.
• Remedies – Payment of specified allowances, default interest (EBID savings rate), costs, compliance reporting.
• Accrued leave – claim dismissed for lack of proof.
|
28 March 2022 |
|
Applicant’s late request to supplement a judgment for damages denied: no omission found and damages unsupported by evidence.
• Human rights – freedom of movement – finding of violation but no damages awarded – request for supplementary judgment to award compensation.
• Procedural law – Articles 63 and 64 of the Court’s Rules – correction/ supplementation of judgments; time limits and extension under Article 64(2).
• Evidence and causation – requirement to establish causal link between State act and claimed damages.
• Costs – unsuccessful party to bear costs; claimed recoverable costs must be evidenced.
|
28 March 2022 |
|
Court found unlawful restriction on speech and arbitrary detention, awarding symbolic damages and costs.
* Jurisdiction – ECOWAS Court – competence to hear alleged human rights violations arising from domestic parliamentary immunity waiver and criminal proceedings.
* Parliamentary immunity – waiver procedure under national law; National Assembly not a judicial tribunal for fair-trial guarantees under Articles 10 UDHR/14 ICCPR.
* Right of defence – access to evidence, legal assistance and adequate time examined; insufficient proof of procedural nullity.
* Freedom of expression – prohibition as parole condition; legality, necessity and proportionality required; unlawful restriction violates Article 9 African Charter, Article 19 UDHR/ICCPR.
* Arbitrary arrest/detention – failure to promptly inform reasons/charges violates Article 9 ICCPR, Article 6 African Charter and UDHR.
* Remedies – symbolic compensation; costs awarded to successful applicant; implementation report ordered.
|
24 March 2022 |
|
Delay of over ten years in prosecution violated the applicant’s right to a fair hearing; State not liable for cruel treatment or discrimination.
Human rights – Fair trial – Unreasonable delay in criminal proceedings amounting to violation of Article 7(1)(a) African Charter; State responsibility – non-state actors and omissions; Remedy and procedural obligations to investigate, arrest and prosecute; Discrimination – requirement to show differential treatment; Reparations – declaratory relief and orders to prosecute.
|
23 March 2022 |
|
Revision dismissed: applicants failed to show a new decisive fact or ownership to justify reopening the judgment.
Revision — Exceptional remedy; requirements: newly discovered fact of decisive character, unknown to Court and applicant, not due to negligence; temporal limits (3 months discovery; 5 years overall). Civil procedure — absence of new decisive fact; alleged non‑disclosure of title did not justify revision where original judgment rested on pending national litigation. Human rights/Property — claims for compensation and discrimination dependent on proof of property right; lack of ownership proof defeats those claims.
|
22 March 2022 |
|
State violated the right to life and failed to investigate a death in custody; compensation ordered.
Human rights – Death in custody – State obligation to account for treatment of persons in detention – Duty to carry out prompt, effective and impartial investigation – Right to life (Article 4) – Duty to investigate (Articles 1 & 4) – Torture allegations (Article 5) – Presumption of innocence (Article 7).
|
21 March 2022 |
|
State security agents’ unjustified lock‑in of peaceful protesters violated Article 11; NGO applicant inadmissible absent representative capacity.
• Human rights – Freedom of assembly – State security forces prevented and detained protesters without lawful justification – Violation of Article 11 of the African Charter.
• Admissibility – Legal person (NGO) cannot sue as an individual for association/assembly rights absent representative capacity – first applicant struck out.
• Locus standi – Individual applicants must establish victimhood and direct harm for association claims.
• Remedies – Moral (non‑pecuniary) damages awarded; exemplary (punitive) damages denied in human rights adjudication.
|
21 March 2022 |
| February 2022 |
|
|
The ECOWAS Court rejected claims of denial of fair hearing in Nigerian electoral appeal, finding no proven human rights violation.
Human rights – Right to fair hearing – Alleged judicial impropriety in electoral matters – Jurisdiction of ECOWAS Court in reviewing domestic court conduct for human rights violations – Threshold for establishing violation – Independence of judiciary – Admissibility requirements.
|
17 February 2022 |
|
The Court struck out an ECOWAS staff member’s employment dispute for failure to exhaust internal remedies before applying.
Administrative law – employment disputes – ECOWAS staff – exhaustion of internal remedies – time limitation – jurisdiction – premature application where internal review not completed.
|
17 February 2022 |
|
State agents’ unlawful killing and prolonged retention of a victim’s corpse violated the rights to life and dignity under the African Charter.
Human rights – Right to life – State responsibility for acts of agents – Unlawful killing by state agents – Right to dignity – Retention of corpse – Remedies and reparation under the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights – Locus standi in human rights applications.
|
15 February 2022 |
| October 2021 |
|
|
No violation found where applicant failed to prove denial of fair hearing or effective judicial remedy due to judicial delay.
Human rights – fair hearing – right to trial within reasonable time – effective judicial remedy – burden of proof – admissibility – jurisdiction – judicial delay – appellate procedures – ECOWAS Court not an appellate forum for national courts' decisions unless proven human rights violations.
|
27 October 2021 |
|
Imposition of high nomination fees by political parties is not a state violation of the right to political participation under Article 13.
Human rights – political participation – nomination fees for elective office – domestic electoral law – ECOWAS Court jurisdiction – margin of appreciation – no violation of Article 13 African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights by State where fees are set by political parties under national law.
|
27 October 2021 |
|
ECOWAS Parliament breached its employment obligations by withholding salaries and allowances due to internal procedural errors.
Community institution employment law – jurisdiction of ECOWAS Court over employment disputes – breach of employment contract by institution – obligation to pay staff salaries and allowances – effect of internal procedural irregularities – principle against benefiting from one’s own wrong – requirement to regularise advances – calculation and entitlement to various allowances under ECOWAS Staff Regulations – interest on late payments – costs.
|
27 October 2021 |
|
A revision application was dismissed as inadmissible for lacking new or decisive facts, reaffirming the finality of the Court’s earlier judgment.
ECOWAS Court – application for revision – admissibility – requirement of new and decisive facts – mere disagreement with prior judgment not sufficient – finality and binding nature of judgments – costs.
|
27 October 2021 |
|
Revision of ECOWAS Court judgments requires new, decisive facts; mere disagreement with conclusions is not reviewable.
International human rights law – ECOWAS Court – application for revision of judgment – admissibility – requirement for new and decisive facts – no appeal from ECOWAS Court final judgment – costs.
|
26 October 2021 |
|
Applicants' claims of human rights violations were dismissed for lack of legal standing as direct or representative victims.
ECOWAS Court – Human rights – Right to life and property – Locus standi – Requirement to prove victim status or authorization in representative actions – Insufficient evidence – Dismissal of claims for lack of legal capacity.
|
21 October 2021 |
| September 2021 |
|
|
A supplementary application for reinstatement and benefits after wrongful termination was dismissed as all claims had been addressed in the prior judgment.
Employment law – wrongful termination – interpretation and supplementation of court judgment – jurisdiction to grant reinstatement and arrear benefits – admissibility and limitations under Articles 63 and 64 of ECOWAS Court Rules.
|
29 September 2021 |
| July 2021 |
|
|
The court found Togo liable for torture, denial of fair hearing, and unlawful termination of a soldier’s employment, awarding compensation.
Human rights – torture – cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment – arbitrary dismissal – right to fair hearing – right to work – admissibility – state responsibility for acts of agents – inquiry and reparations
|
9 July 2021 |
