SW Radio Africa (London)
Alex Bell
24 June 2011
The top legal minds from the Southern African Development Community (SADC) have all demanded compensation over the closure of the region’s human rights Tribunal, a move the judges have said was ‘illegal’.
In the strongest criticism yet of the shock move by SADC leaders in May, four former Tribunal Judges have written a scathing letter to the regional bloc, blasting its decision to suspend the court. The Judges, drawn from across the region to head up the Tribunal, have all effectively been forced out of their positions by SADC’s unprecedented decision to close the court.
The four judges, whose five-year term expired in August 2010, had remained in office, despite SADC last year deciding to review the role of the court. This was the result of SADC’s apparent unwillingness to hold Zimbabwe to account for refusing to honour the Tribunal’s 2008 rulings that Robert Mugabe’s land grab was unlawful. A review was ordered instead, but the Judges said they stayed put, due to the “legitimate and reasonable expectation that, at the end of the initial independent review commissioned by the SADC Heads of State, their terms of office would be renewed.”
This expectation was then justified when that independent review confirmed that the Tribunal was properly established, and that its rulings had jurisdiction across the region, and that its protocol was in accordance with international law.
But instead of upholding the review findings, a SADC Summit in May took the decision to dissolve the Tribunal for a further 12 months, dealing a devastating blow to the rule of law in the region. The move has been described as ‘regressive’ because it denies individual people access to justice when they have no legal recourse in their own countries.
The four judges seeking compensation are Justice Ariranga G Pillay (Mauritius) former president and member; Justice Rigoberto Kambovo (Angola) former member; Justice Onkemetse B Tshosa (Botswana) former member; and Justice Frederick Chomba (Zambia) former member.
Their letter reads; “We consider, therefore, that Council and Summit should face up to the consequences of their action in the circumstances and pay fair and adequate compensation for the prejudice, both material and moral, caused to the President and members of the Tribunal whose term of office was not renewed.”
In their letter they say the decision to dissolve the court is “clearly illegal and ultra vires (invalid) because the Summit has no power to restrict the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, not the least because it is itself subject to the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.”
The judges also questioned why the SADC council of Justice Ministers expressed concern about the role and jurisdiction of the Tribunal, instead of deciding the appropriate action to take against Zimbabwe for non-compliance of the Tribunal’s judgments.
“We did not expect or foresee…the new drastic action taken on political grounds which at a stroke does away with the intractable problem of taking action against Zimbabwe,” the letter reads.
The judges add; “So this extraordinary deed was done at the expense of the Tribunal and its judges who are both easily expendable, in breach of the principles of human rights, democracy and the rule of law.”
The SADC Tribunal Rights Watch group has since endorsed the judges’ statement, echoing their concerns that the move sends “the worst possible signal not only to the SADC region but also to potential investors, donors and the international community at large: that the highest authorities of SADC at best pay only lip service to the principles of human rights, democracy and the rule of law and do not scrupulously adhere to them.”
AllAfrica – All the Time
Taken from:
Southern Africa: Judges Blast Regional Leaders