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

IF 0.5 Q3 LAW

Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals Pub Date : 2020-11-27 DOI:10.1163/15718034-12341432

M. J. Nkhata

{"title":"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","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":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"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\":null,\"pages\":null},\"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}","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

摘要

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。

查看原文本刊更多论文

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

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.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals LAW-

CiteScore

1.30

自引率

40.00%

发文量

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.