Mouvement des Réfugiés Mauritaniens au Sénégal v. Sénégal, African Commission
on Human and Peoples' Rights, Comm. No. 162/97 (1997).
The Facts
1. The complainant
alleges that during the operations carried out from 16‑29 October 1996
in the region of Podor, Mauritanian refugees established there were the main
targets of the Senegalese security forces. Refugees were reportedly arrested
and subjected to all sorts of humiliating treatment during identity checks.
The green card the Senegalese State had issued to them were allegedly not
regarded as valid by the security forces who considered them expired.
2. The complainant
further alleges that a group of individuals described as Mauritanian refugees
were arrested by the Senegalese gendarmerie in Mboumba and on the Island of
Morphil in October 1996.
4. In a note verbale
dated 24 July 1997, addressed to the Secretariat of the Commission, the Senegalese
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriate Senegalese maintains that since
the month of December 1995, when the United Nations High Commission for Refugees
stopped distributing food, the majority of Mauritanian refugees voluntarily
returned to Mauritania and those who remained are moving about freely, that
they are shuttling between Rosso/Senegal and Rosso/Mauritania trying to reach
an agreement with the Waly of Trarza in order to arrange for their final repatriation.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs insists that, in spite of the fact the refugees
do not carry green cards they are nevertheless free to go about their business
on both sides of the common border.
5. The Ministry of
Foreign Affairs also claims that the following four Mauritanian refugees:
Samba Mbare, Alassane Bodia, Oumar Bodia and Balla Samba arrested by the Senegalese
gendarmerie for allegedly taking part in the murder of an officer of the Mauritanian
gendarmerie, were set free for lack of evidence. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs
therefore argues that the communication should be declared inadmissible on
the grounds that the allegations it contains are unfounded.
6. In reaction to
the arguments of the defendant State, the complainant reiterated the facts
alleged and rejected the Senegalese government's claim that the refugees voluntarily
returned to their home country. According to the complainant, the refugees
decided to return not individually but as a group and only after obtaining
assurances about their security and reintegration into Mauritanian society.
7. The complainant
claims that those refugees who left for Mauritania returned to Senegal because
of threats they faced from Mauritanian authorities, the lack of assistance
and the undisguised indifference of Mauritarians concerning their situation.
The complainant reiterates that the refugees continue to be handicapped by
the fact that they do not possess green cards. The lack of this document prevents
them for example from applying for employment within the Senegalese civil
service.
8. The communication,
however, does not indicate the provisions of the African Charter of Human
and Peoples' the defendant State may have violated.
The
Procedure
9. The communication
was received by the Secretariat on 9 January 1997.
10. On 16 January 1997,
the Secretariat informed the defendant State by note verbale about the substance
of the communication. On the same day, it wrote to the complainant requesting
it to state whether the information contained in its letter of 4 November
1996 was to be considered as a communication under the terms of article 55
of the Charter.
11.
On 21 January 1997, the complainant replied in the affirmative to the question
asked by the Secretariat.
12.
On 27 February 1997, the Secretariat informed the complainant that its complaint
had been recorded under number 162/97 and that it would be submitted to the
Commission for a decision on its admissibility at the 21st ordinary session
scheduled for April 1997.
13. On the same day,
a note verbale was addressed to the defendant, informing it that the communication
had been recorded and requesting it to submit its views about its admissibility.
14. On 19 March 1997,
the Secretariat received a note verbale emanating from the Senegalese High
Commission in the Gambia, acknowledging receipt of its note of 16 Janvier
1997 and informing it that the dossier had been referred to the competent
Senegalese authorities.
15. At the 21st session,
the Communication was submitted to the Commission which decided to postpone
consideration of its admissibility until the 22nd session to be held in November
1997.
16. On 13 June 1997,
the Secretariat addressed a note verbale to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
of Senegal, informing it of the Commission's decision and requesting it to
send its government's observations and arguments concerning this matter.
17. On 24 July 1997,
the Secretariat received a note verbale from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
of Senegal containing the observations and arguments of its government on
this matter.
18. On 25 July 1997,
the Secretariat wrote to the complainant sending it a copy of the defendant's
reply and requesting its own response. This response was received by the Secretariat
on 6 October 1997.
19. At the 22nd session
held from 2‑11 November 1997, the Commission reached a decision on the
question of admissibility.
The Law
Admissibility
20. The Commission
recalls that under the terms of the provisions of article 56 par. 5, communications
shall be considered by the Commission if they "are sent after exhausting
local remedies, if any, unless it is obvious that this procedure is unduly
prolonged".
21. In this case, it
should be noted that the complainant avoids saying that it has not used the
remedies supposed to be available to it under the legal system of the defendant
State. Further, it simply presents facts which, prima facie, do not show that
the Senegalese State may be responsible.
22. Further, the complainant
does not mention the provisions of the Charter which the Senegalese State
may have violated.
On these grounds,
the Commission
Declares the communication inadmissible.
Decision taken at the 22nd session, Banjul (The Gambia), 11 November
1997.