Amicable Settlement of Disputes and Proactive Remediation of Violations under the African Human Rights System

Abstract

The communication procedures of international human rights tribunals in a few cases have served as catalysts for amicable settlement of disputes and self-initiated redress of human rights violations. International litigation has the potential of exposing states to undesirable negative publicity which could affect their standing before their donors and in the comity of nations. In a bid to avoid the "naming and shaming" and negative publicity associated with having to defend a potentially scandalous human rights violations case, states in Africa have found it desirable, in some cases, to submit to a private confidential process of amicable settlement or to quickly undertake proactive measures to redress the violations before a decision is made on the merits by the relevant human rights tribunal. This article examines notable examples of amicable settlement of disputes in the African human rights system and the inherent potentials and pitfalls in the use of such mechanisms for the promotion and protection of human rights in Africa. While focusing on the three main regional human rights tribunals in Africa, the article argues the need for the overhauling of the rules of procedures of the three human rights bodies examined, which are largely underdeveloped with regard to the specific requirements and conditions for arriving at a friendly settlement. The article also highlights the importance of funding and professionalism to the proper handling of the friendly settlement procedure and discusses other factors responsible for the underutilization of the friendly settlement procedure by regional human rights tribunals in Africa.

Enhancing Amicable Settlement of Construction Disputes Via A Systems Approach

“…Hence, amicable settlement has become a widely held approach in the resolution of disputes. Ayeni (2019) highlights the importance of proficiency in handling settlement procedures and suggests several non-structural reforms. Aida (2007) in his research on Sulh, the ethics of Arabian law, contends that no precedence should be given over the formal, truth-seeking procedures of adjudication.…”