• Login
    View Item 
    •   ResearchSpace Home
    • College of Law and Management Studies
    • School of Law
    • Public and International Law
    • Masters Degrees (International Law)
    • View Item
    •   ResearchSpace Home
    • College of Law and Management Studies
    • School of Law
    • Public and International Law
    • Masters Degrees (International Law)
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    The human rights jurisdiction of the SADC tribunal and the East African Court of Justice : legal and political implications.

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    Thesis (1.180Mb)
    Date
    2016
    Author
    Tembo, Simbarashe.
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Sub-regional Economic Communities have increasingly become important in the promotion, protection, and human rights in Africa. Sub-regional human rights courts potentially bring international justice closer to victims in their respective regions. However, there is a debate surrounding the acquisition of human rights jurisdiction by the SADC Tribunal and the East African Court of Justice through broad purposive interpretation of their respective treaties. Many scholars however agree that the judges correctly afforded human rights jurisdiction to both Courts. They argue that human rights jurisdiction is an incident of the principles rule of law, democracy and good governance, which find meaning within the ambit of both treaties. The cases of Mike Campbell v The Republic of Zimbabwe, in the SADC Tribunal, and Katabazi v The Secretary General of the EAC, in the EACJ resulted in the conferment of human rights jurisdiction on both Courts. Even though these cases were fundamentally similar, they received varying responses from their respective Sub-regional Economic Communities. This work critically analyses the human rights jurisdiction of these Courts and unpacks these different reactions. The SADC Tribunal is currently suspended and a New Protocol to establish a new Tribunal without human rights jurisdiction was adopted. By using Roux’s theory of ‘tactical adjudication’, it aims to show how the negative reaction to the SADC Tribunal’s judgment might have been avoided or mitigated, thereby maintaining its institutional security.
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10413/14148
    Collections
    • Masters Degrees (International Law) [5]

    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2013  Duraspace
    Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Theme by 
    @mire NV
     

     

    Browse

    All of ResearchSpaceCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsAdvisorsTypeThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsAdvisorsType

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2013  Duraspace
    Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Theme by 
    @mire NV