AFRICAN UNION
UNION AFRICAINE
UNIÃO AFRICANA
African Commission on Human &
Peoples’ Rights
Commission Africaine des Droits de
l’Homme & des Peuples
31, Bijilo Layout Annex, Kombo North District, Western Region, P. O. Box 673, Banjul, The Gambia
Tel: (220) 4410505/4410506; Fax: (220) 4410504; E-mail: au-banjul@africa-union.org; Website: http://www.achpr.org
Communication 289/2004 – Mr Brahima Koné and Mr Tiéoulé Diarra vs
Côte d’Ivoire
Summary of the Facts
1. The Complaint was filed at the African Commission on Human and Peoples’
Rights on 12 May 2004 by Mr Brahima Koné and Mr Amadou Tiéoulé Diarra, on
behalf of the High Council of Malian Foreigners in the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire
and the African Solidarity Movement for Democracy and Independence (SADI)
against Côte d’Ivoire, a State Party to the African Charter which it ratified on 6
January 1992.
2. The Complainants allege that following the decision of the Ivorian Supreme
Court rejecting the candidature of Alassane Ouattara for the presidential
election, there were demonstrations in protest against the said decision.
3. Following these demonstrations, agents of the ruling government in Abidjan
started, from September 2002, to carry out arbitrary arrests, summary executions
and massive and forced expulsions, mainly targeting Senegalese, Nigeriens,
Guineans, Malians and Burkinabes, irrespective of whether they were
naturalised Ivorians or not.
4. The Complainants further allege that the property of these victims, suspected to
be members of Alassane Ouattara’s Rally of the Republicans (RDR) party, were
seized throughout Côte d’Ivoire.
Complaint
5. The Complainants allege that the facts stated above are a violation of Articles 2,
3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 18, 20, 21 and 23 of the African Charter on Human and
Peoples’ Rights by Côte d’Ivoire.
Procedure:
6. The complaint was received at the Secretariat of the Commission on 12 May 2004,
and the latter acknowledged receipt on 23 June 2004.
7. At its 36th Ordinary Session held in Dakar, Senegal, from 23 November to 7
December 2004, the Commission considered Communication 289/04, Mr Brahima
Koné and Mr Tiéoulé Diarra vs Côte d’Ivoire and decided to be seized of it.
8. By a letter and a note verbale dated 20 December 2004, the Secretariat of the
Commission informed the parties of the decision of the Commission and
requested them to submit their written observations on the admissibility of the
communication.
9. At its 37th and 38th Ordinary Sessions, the Commission considered the complaint
and, due to the lack of submissions from the parties, decided to defer its
consideration on the admissibility of the said communication.
10. By letters dated 15 March 2005, 2 June 2005 and 12 September 2005, the
Secretariat of the Commission reminded the parties to submit their conclusions
to enable the Commission to decide on the admissibility of the case.
11. On 7 November 2005, the Secretariat of the Commission finally received the
conclusions of the Respondent State on the admissibility of the case.
12. On 15 December 2005, 4 April 2006, 19 July 2006, 29 September 2006, 8 December
2006 and 2 May 2007, the Secretariat of the Commission informed the parties that
the Commission could not consider the communication at its various sessions
due to the lack of the Complainants’ observations on the admissibility of the
case. The Secretariat also reminded the Complainants in each letter to submit
their conclusions to enable the Commission to decide on admissibility.
13. On 23 May 2007, the Secretariat received from the Respondent State a letter
requesting the Commission to stay its consideration of the communication, given
that the internal Ivorian mechanisms wanted to work with the Complainants to
explore the possibility of an amicable settlement.
14. On 25 September 2007, the Secretariat of the Commission forwarded a copy of
the letter on the amicable settlement initiated by the Respondent State to the
Complainants for their consideration.
15. On 20 June 2007, 19 December 2007 and 19 March 2008, the Secretariat sent letters
to the parties informing them that the Commission
has considered
Communication 289/2004 - Mr Brahima Koné and Mr Tiéoulé Diarra vs Côte d’Ivoire
and decided to defer its decision while waiting for the Complainants’ response to
the proposed amicable settlement initiated by the Respondent State.
16. On 30 April 2008, the Complainants sent to the Secretariat of the Commission a
letter indicating that they accepted the proposal of the Respondent State for a
compromise settlement, on the condition that the Respondent State offers prior
technical guarantees for such a settlement.
17. Between July 2008 and 14 August 2012, the Secretariat sent more than 5 letters
reminding the parties, in particular the Complainants, to provide the
Commission with information on the progress made regarding the negotiations
conducted by the Government of Côte d’Ivoire towards an amicable settlement.
18. By a letter dated 14 August 2012 that was sent to the Complainants, the
Secretariat reiterated its request for information on the progress made regarding
the negotiations conducted by the Government of Côte d’Ivoire towards an
amicable settlement of the present communication. The Secretariat also stated
that if there is no response from the Complainants within one month, that is, by
14 September 2012, the Commission would be obliged to strike out the
communication for lack of diligent prosecution.
Analysis of the Commission
19. Rule 113 of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission stipulates that when a
deadline is fixed for a particular submission, either party may apply to the
Commission for extension of the period stipulated. The Commission may grant
an extension which shall not exceed one (1) month.
20. To date, the Complainants have not responded to the requests of the Secretariat
of the Commission, including the one dated 14 August 2012, and have still not
provided information on developments regarding the amicable settlement
initiated by the Respondent State. They have also not requested any extension of
the deadline in order to provide this information.
21. Given the prolonged and unjustified lack of response from the Complainants, the
Commission has decided to take a decision on the matter.
Decision of the Commission
22. In view of the foregoing, the Commission, with seven Commissioners for and
two against, finds that there is a lack of interest on the part of the Complainants
and decides to strike out the communication for lack of diligent prosecution.
Done at the 52nd Ordinary Session of the Commission held from 9 to 22 October
2012 in Yamoussoukro, Côte d’Ivoire.
Dissenting Opinions of Commissioner Catherine Dupe Atoki and Commissioner
Pansy Tlakula
When considering the issue of striking out Communication 289/2004 – Mr Brahima
Koné and Mr Tiéoulé Diarra vs Côte d’Ivoire, the members of the Commission did not
reach a consensus, with seven Commissioners for and two against. Commissioner
Catherine Dupe Atoki and Commissioner Pansy Tlakula held a different opinion from
that of the majority of the Commissioners that the communication should be struck out.
They were of the view that given that there is no available information on the progress
made regarding an amicable settlement, the Commission, instead of striking out the
Communication, ought to request the parties to submit their observations on
admissibility and continue to consider the Communication.