Rwanda's President Paul Kagame. Rwanda has come under criticism from civil society organisations for withdrawing from the protocol that created the Arusha-based African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights. PHOTO | TIZIANA FABI | AFP.
Summary
- Rwanda withdrew its article 34(6) declaration of the Protocol on the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the establishment of the ACHPRs.
- Previously, Rwanda had been commended for being one of the first states to accept the jurisdiction of the African court to hear cases brought directly by individuals and NGOs.
- Twenty-eight AU countries have ratified the protocol but only seven of them have made the declaration.
The East African
Community nation withdrew its article 34(6) declaration of the Protocol
on the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the establishment
of the ACHPRs.
In a statement the organisations'
termed Rwanda's move as a setback for human rights protection in the
country and across Africa.
The organisations included African Centre for Justice and Peace Studies (ACJPS) of Sudan,
African Court Coalition Association for Justice, Peace and Democracy (AJPD), Angola and Association Malienne des Droits de l'Homme (AMDH), Mali.
African Court Coalition Association for Justice, Peace and Democracy (AJPD), Angola and Association Malienne des Droits de l'Homme (AMDH), Mali.
Others
are, Association rwandaise pour la Défense des droits de la personne et
des libertés publiques (ADL) of Rwanda, Association Tchadienne pour la
Promotion et la Défense des droits de l'Homme (ATPDH) (Chad) Centre for
the Study of Violence and Conciliation (CSVR), South Africa’s Chapter
Four and Uganda's Defenders.
"As members of African and
international civil society we have a vested interest in ensuring a
strong and independent African human rights architecture to promote and
protect human and peoples' rights on the continent," the statement said.
The
groups said the ability for individuals and non-governmental
organisations (NGOs) to file cases directly before the African Court –
the principal human rights tribunal on the continent – significantly
reduces barriers of entry for survivors and victims of human rights
violations seeking redress and significantly increases the capacity of
the court to carry out its crucial mandate.
Previously,
Rwanda had been commended for being one of the first states to accept
the jurisdiction of the African court to hear cases brought directly by
individuals and NGOs.
"However, particularly at a time
when African states are demanding ‘African solutions to African
problems’ this unprecedented decision to withdraw an article 34(6)
declaration and the Rwandan government's failure to subsequently
participate in proceedings before the court substantially undermines
region-wide efforts to strengthen African human rights institutions and
sends an alarming message about the Rwandan government's commitment to
justice and human rights in general."
The NGOs added:
"We call upon the African Union and all African states committed to the
continued development of the African Human Rights System to join us in
urging the Rwandan government to retract its withdrawal of its article
34(6) declaration."
"We call upon all African states to
strengthen the African Court's role for the promotion and protection of
human and peoples' rights throughout the continent by ratifying the
existing Protocol and depositing declarations allowing individual and
NGOs direct access to the court"
Making the required
declaration under Article 34(6) of the protocol establishing the court
allows direct access to the court by individuals and NGOs.
Twenty-eight AU countries have ratified the protocol but only seven of them have made the declaration.
No comments:
Post a Comment