Décisions relatives aux communications

Communication 736/20: Lado James c. Republic of South Sudan

eng-Communication 736-20 Lado James v South Sudan.pdf
No translation in Français. Showing Anglais.
UNION AFRICAINE AFRICAN UNION UNIAO AFRICANA Africun Comm1ssio,1 on H11man & Peoples • Righrs Commission Africaine des Droits de /'Homme & des Peuples 31 Biji!o Annalc' Layout, Kombo North District, Western Region,P. 0 Box 873, Banjul, TheGambia Tel: (220) 4410505 / 4410506; Fax: (220) 4410504 E-mail: au-ban·u africa-union.o : Web www.ach _o,; Communication 736/20 Lado James Paul, Ayume Dada & others (Represented by John Gerry Emmanuel) V Republic of South Sudan .Adopted by the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights During the 6'71"0rdinary Session done virtuallyfrom 13 November to 3rr1 December 2021
Decision of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights on Withdrawal Communication 736/20 - Lado James Paul, Ayume Dada & others (Represented by John Gerry Emmanuel) v The Republic of South Sudan ~ Summary of the Complaint 1. The Secretariat of the African on Human and "Peopl Rights (the Secretariat) received a Complaint on 4 December 2017~ m Jo . Gerry Emmanuel (the Complainant) on behalf of Lado James...Pauf~yu tt Elada and others (the Victims), against the Republic of So~ Suclan (the Respotdent St te). ~ ~-t ~-~ 2. The Complainant alleges that iJ.1,July 201'-4 and on•S January 2015, Lado James Paul 4 and Ayume Dada were anested{a i detru,s.~d igrJuba by the ~onal security on allegations that they' support the*Sudari People's Liberation Movement-inOpposition (SPL~ - 10), a breakar7ay: $If>_u p fro~_;he Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPt~"'a nd a · awful~ liticait ~rty in the country. 3. The Complru11ant alleges that the N;a tional Security Service established a detention centre in the ca.ffl!l, which continu1 to be used to detain people (the other Victims) w{thoutcharges of access to judges. Th~omplainant alleges that the number of de~ inees and theii conditions arli unknown to anyone but the Service officers, since· fo~ation,.ebout tliem is ~ ied and access to the facility is prohibited. 4. The Co lainan'tjfurther alleges that in addition to the ousting of the jurisdiction of the court through the..:p,_Jovisions of Article 21(1) (c) of the National Security Service Act, e,. Complainant alleges that the judiciary in South Sudan cannot be said to be indeec dent and impartial, particularly since members of the judiciary went on strike on 21 April 2017 to protest allegations of corruption and maladministration. He states that this resulted in the President dismissing fourteen (14) of the striking judges, with9,µ,!:f~$'~._~eaving the remaining judges with a fear of reprisal from the executi~~\~~ar,~r •o~ Application for Withdrawal ll ~,u} --~\ ~~). \\ : !IJ 1,' \ ·4, p,:,_.,. f / ..J ;,' -J-" 'l, \. ,0..,.MR&:~ $'' "-~"t>,., •: :n~"'?< ..,{I'S I
5. The African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights (African Commission) was seized of the Communication during its 27th Extra-ordinary Session, held from 19 February - 4 March 2020. 6. A request for withdrawal and discontinuation of the Communication was received from the Complainant on 4 June 2020. The Complainant submitted that he appointed a new legal representative and upon notice of seizure of his Complaint, it was learned that the circumstances have changed, which affects the merits of the Complaint. In consultation with his legal teP..t entativc, he has decided to discontinue the process of this Communication. L Analysis of the African Commission . A , 7. The Commission sees no objection i11, granting this requ t. Decision of the African Commissio 8. The Commission decides to g e thdrawa~ Done Virtua ff s 67th Ordinary Session, Id from 13 Novembe_r to 3 December 2020 ~ .q ,~~ ·~~

Created 1 juil. 2026 · Edited 12 août 2026