Under the African regional human rights system, relevant legal instruments confer substantive human and peoples’ rights on African individuals and groups. There are also some justice mechanisms (judicial and quasi-judicial) for their enforcement at the regional level when local remedies fail or are non-existent. However, due to factors like political influence and the nature of some provisions of some of the instruments, access to the mechanisms and, therefore, to justice, eludes most individuals and groups. This article, inter alia, examines the extent of access guaranteed individuals and groups to the mechanisms available at the African regional level for enforcing their rights against violator African states. It discusses different impediments to this access and the consequent injustice. It suggests reforms, such as amendment of the access-impeding provisions of the relevant instruments.
Celestine Nchekwube Ezennia
The International Criminal Court (icc) is a global court created to administer independent and impartial international criminal justice. It, therefore, has jurisdiction over all persons who have committed ‘the most important crimes of international concern’, including genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. The court’s principal mission is to ensure the punishment of these crimes and the eradication of the impunity of their perpetrators in all parts of the world. However, the icc’s current justice administration system appears so selective and subject to external influence and manipulation as to defeat the global, independent, and impartial justice goal that the court is created to accomplish. This article examines this selectivity under the following sub-headings: geographic selectivity, situation selectivity, identity selectivity, and thematic selectivity. The article further explores some of the consequences of this selective justice regime and suggests some reforms in the system.