Res judicata and the Admissibility of Applications before the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights: a Fresh Look at Dexter Eddie Johnson v. Republic of Ghana

IF 0.5 Q3 LAW
M. J. Nkhata
{"title":"Res judicata and the Admissibility of Applications before the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights: a Fresh Look at Dexter Eddie Johnson v. Republic of Ghana","authors":"M. J. Nkhata","doi":"10.1163/15718034-12341432","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nIn Dexter Eddie Johnson v. Republic of Ghana, the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (the Court), for only the second time in its history, applied Article 56(7) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (the Charter) to declare a case inadmissible. The Court reasoned that the case was inadmissible since the applicant had first approached, and obtained a determination, from the United Nations Human Rights Committee before lodging his case with the Court. This article analyses the Court’s decision and attempts to unpack the Court’s interpretation and application of the doctrine of res judicata, which is the essence of the requirement in Article 56(7) of the Charter.","PeriodicalId":42613,"journal":{"name":"Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals","volume":"7 1","pages":"470-496"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718034-12341432","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In Dexter Eddie Johnson v. Republic of Ghana, the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (the Court), for only the second time in its history, applied Article 56(7) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (the Charter) to declare a case inadmissible. The Court reasoned that the case was inadmissible since the applicant had first approached, and obtained a determination, from the United Nations Human Rights Committee before lodging his case with the Court. This article analyses the Court’s decision and attempts to unpack the Court’s interpretation and application of the doctrine of res judicata, which is the essence of the requirement in Article 56(7) of the Charter.
既判力和非洲人权和人民权利法院申请的可受理性:重新审视德克斯特·埃迪·约翰逊诉加纳共和国案
在德克斯特·埃迪·约翰逊诉加纳共和国案中,非洲人权和人民权利法院(法院)在其历史上第二次适用《非洲人权和人民权利宪章》(《宪章》)第56(7)条,宣布一个案件不予受理。法院的理由是,该案件不可受理,因为申请人在向法院提出案件之前首先与联合国人权事务委员会接触并获得了裁决。本文分析了法院的判决,并试图揭示法院对既判力原则的解释和适用,既判力原则是《宪章》第五十六条第七款要求的实质。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
40.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals is firmly established as the leading journal in its field. Each issue will give you the latest developments with respect to the preparation, adoption, suspension, amendment and revision of Rules of Procedure as well as statutory and internal rules and other related matters. The Journal will also provide you with the latest practice with respect to the interpretation and application of rules of procedure and constitutional documents, which can be found in judgments, advisory opinions, written and oral pleadings as well as legal literature.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信