No description available.

"The judiciary in Zimbabwe used to be viewed as a progressive bench recognised for its activism, particularly its purposive approach in interpreting the Bill of Rights to ensure protection of human rights. It was one of the best Commonwealth judiciaries, which was inspired by international standards in interpreting human rights and at the same time contributed to the origination of normative standards through its decisions. Although Zimbabwe is a dualist system, the judiciary accepted and drew inspiration from international human rights treaties. The Supreme Court (SC) under Chief Justice (CJ) Gubbay (the Gubbay bench) made several progressive pronouncements that favoured the promotion and protection of human rights. In tandem with its tradition of judicial independence, the judiciary interpreted draconian legislation in favour of human rights often striking down the offensive clauses in legislation. Indeed the perception towards the judiciary by the common person was that of a protector of human rights. One landmark human rights decision on the Land Reform Programme (LRP) stated that farm invasions were unlawful and an affront to section 16 of the Constitution. The SC ordered the executive to take necessary measures to ensure that invasions were sanctioned. It further requested the executive to furnish a plan of action for the LRP. The execuitve did not welcome this ruling and the SC judges wre hounded out of office in a clear culmination of judiciary-executive tension. A new bench came in under CJ Chidyausiku (the Chidyausiku bench). This bench made several rulings that took away individual property rights without justification. In a clear shift of jurisprudential ideology, the current bench has not engaged in activism resulting in less, if not no, protection of human rights. The disparity in the jurisprudence is evident in other cases. The current bench seems to have abrogated its mandate to protect human rights. This study is thus prompted to investigate why the different benches in Zimbabwe have produced totally variant jurisprudence, particularly in light of the fact that the judiciary is operating under the same laws and is appointed under the same procedures as before. ... Chapter 1 sets out the focus and content of the study. Chapter 2 gives a national framework for human rights protection in Zimbabwe. This looks at the structure of courts in Zimbabwe. Special emphasis is placed on the SC as the court that has the prime mandate of protecting human rights. Constitutional guarantees for the independence of the judiciary and the Bill of Rights, among others, is analysed. Chapter 3 deals with human rights jurisprudence of the SC benches. The chapter focuses on approach of the benches to human rights protection. It examines the approach to procedural and technicalities that often hinder human rights litigation and protection such as standing, delay, interpretation, compliance with court orders and use of international instruments. Chapter 4 focuses on the experiences from Uganda and analyses the approach of the Ugandan courts. Chapter 5 consists of best practices from the two jurisdictions, conclusion and recommendations for the Zimbabwean judiciary." -- Introduction. / Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)) -- University of Pretoria, 2005. / Prepared under the supervision of Professor Frederick Jjuuko at Human Rights and Peace Centre, Faculty of Law, Makerere University in Uganda / http://www.chr.up.ac.za/academic_pro/llm1/dissertations.html / Centre for Human Rights / LLM

"The purpose of this study is to interrogate the doctrine of margin of appreciation as applied in the European Court of Human Rights and establish amenable lessos to the African human rights system. As such, the author will be able to draw appropriate and informed recommendations on the prospects of the doctrine in African context. In other words, the study proceeds from the approach that 'diversity' alone is not enough to guarantee application of margin of appreciation. Rather, a variety of factors come into consideration while weighing whether margin of appreciation should be granted to states. Indeed, such benchmarks will inform the discourse of this study, while at the same time acknowledging that a comparative study between European and African systems cannot be possible. The premise for disqualifying a comparison assumes that margin of appreciation presupposes a democratic society. Thus, while the member states of the ECHR have attained high levels of human rights records, some of their counterparts in Africa are still marred by embarrassing human rights records." -- Preamble. "Chapter one introduces the study and the context in which it is set. It highlights the basis and structure of the study. Chapter two makes reference to the connotation, origin and development of the doctrine of margin of appreciation. It discusses also contours and varying degrees of the doctrine's application with particular regard to respect of the rule of law. In addition, difficulties linked to the doctrine are highlighted. Chapter three highlights policy grounds underlying margin of appreciation in the European Court of Human Rights. It starts from most decisive policy grounds and moves to weaker ones. Chapter four examines the legal basis for application of the doctrine of margin of appreciation under the African Charter. It further notes the attitude of African states through their submissions claiming margin. The Prince case as the first of its kind to invoke margin of appreciation is discussed. Chapter five attempts to identify the defensibility and indefensibility of the doctrine in [the] African human rights system. Chapter six consists of a summary of the presentation and the conclusions drawn from the entire study." -- Introduction. / Prepared under the supervision of Prof. Gilles Cistac at the Faculty of Law, Universidade Eduardo Mondlane, Maputo, Mocambique / Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)) -- University of Pretoria, 2006. / http://www.chr.up.ac.za/academic_pro/llm1/dissertations.html / Centre for Human Rights / LLM