The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights is commemorating its 20th anniversary this year as a continental court, with celebration, however, heralding the agitation for member countries to deposit the declaration of Article 34 (6).

The Court was established by African countries to ensure the protection of human and people’s rights on the continent. Yet, citizens and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) are denied direct access to the court for failure of their countries to deposit the controversial declaration under the Court’s protocol that recognises its competence to receive cases directly from NGOs and individuals.

Article 34(6) of the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights allows individual citizens and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) with observer status to directly file complaints against a State party, provided that the state has made a special declaration accepting this jurisdiction.

However, since the deposit is optional, a supplementary declaration to the protocol ratification has created a lacuna that countries with high incidents of rights violations explore.

The first judges of the African Court were elected in January 2006 in Khartoum, Sudan and were sworn in before the 7th Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the African Union on July 2, 2006, in Banjul, The Gambia.

Out of the 34 state parties to the Protocol, only eight, including Burkina Faso, The Gambia, Ghana, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Malawi, Niger and Tunisia, have deposited the controversial declaration that will enable the Court receive cases directly from NGOs and individuals.

Unfortunately, Tunisia formally notified the African Union on March 7, 2025, of its decision to withdraw its declaration under Article 34(6) of the Protocol, leaving the court with only seven member states, a situation that undermined the major objective of the court, which is to guarantee people’s rights on the continent.

Recall also that while the Court is domiciled in Tanzania, the country was among the five countries that withdrew their declaration afterwards. Others are Rwanda, Benin, Côte d’Ivoire and Tunisia.

While Nigeria is one of the 34 countries that have ratified the Court’s protocol, and has one of its citizens, Justice Stella I. Anukam, sitting as a judge in the court, having been elected for the second tenure, its government has remained indifferent towards the deposition of the Court’s article that is crucial to the protection of its citizens’ rights.

Provoked by the actions of successive Nigerian governments, some human rights lawyers had, in the past, approached national courts, seeking an order to compel the government to deposit the declaration so that aggrieved Nigerians, who are uncomfortable with national courts, can seek redress at the continental level.

Femi Falana (SAN) was one of the lawyers who personally dragged the federal government before the Federal High Court. However, the suit was dismissed on the ground that the court lacked requisite jurisdiction to grant his prayers; that the law establishing African Court did not make provisions for how member states could make the needed declaration and that the use of the word, “optional”, in the law establishing the court gave member states the discretion to decide whether or not to make the declaration.

The court also observed that there was no mechanism for compelling member states to deposit the declaration, thus making it difficult to mandate states to do so.

The Court had, in 2023, written to the Nigerian government, explaining its crucial position on the continent and the reason it should champion the process.

According to Nigeria’s Justice Anukam, the deposition of the declaration under the protocol by her country will not only make her proud as a sitting judge of the court but will also raise the country’s profile for human rights compliance.

She recalled that the Court had on December 8, 2022, written to the former President Muhammadu Buhari, former Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice on the matter.

“Even the board of the Human Rights Commission also paid a courtesy visit to the AGF lately on the issue, while some human rights lawyers, including Falana, have written to the government, asking that they do the right thing.”

“I think this is the best time for Nigeria to deposit the declaration. This should be a subtle reminder to the government because it will be a big plus to Nigeria and the present government to do so.

“It will enhance our image as a human rights-compliant country. It will also be a big celebration in Nigeria. As the most populous African nation, once Nigeria takes a step, the remaining African nations that are yet to deposit will follow because many countries are looking up to us”, she had said.

But three years later, Nigeria seemed to have forgotten all about the crucial article while rights violation soar. Critics argue that it would be difficult for a country that has high rates of rights violations to champion citizens’ direct access to the continental court. That to them would be self-indictment.