Holding
179. The action of the Respondent State to stop the Complainants from publishing their newspapers, close their business premises and seize their equipment resulted in them and their employees not being able to express themselves through their regular medium; and to disseminate information. The confiscation of the Complainants’ equipment and depriving them of a source of income and livelihood is also a violation of their right to property guaranteed under Article 14. By closing their business premises and preventing the Complainants’ and their employees to work [sic], the Respondent State also violated Article 15 of the Charter. Thus, whether motivated by the Supreme Court’s decision or through its own initiative, the action of the Respondent State resulted to an infringement of the rights of the Complainants. The Commission thus finds the State in violation of Articles 9.2, 14 and 15 of the African Charter.
180. The African Commission thus finds the Respondent State has not violated Articles 3 and 7 of the African Charter as alleged by the Complainants.
181. The African Commission however finds the Respondent State in violation of Articles 9.2, 14 and 15 of the African Charter.
182. Since a violation of any provision of the Charter necessarily connotes the State Party’s obligation under Article 1, the African Commission also finds the Respondent State in violation of Article 1 of the African Charter. The African Commission thus recommends that the Respondent State provides adequate compensation to the Complainants for the loss they have incurred as a result of this violation.
Adopted at the 6th Extra Ordinary Session of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 30th March-3rd April, 2009, Banjul, The Gambia.
