After four years of a civil lawsuit battle, the African Court on Human and People’s Rights ruled on favour of the Rwandan government against a disgruntled former employee who accused government of unlawful dismissal.

Mr Chrysanthe Rutabingwa’s lawsuit was dismissed on grounds that he failed to exploit all local channels available for dispute resolution before approaching the continental court, as Rwanda’s laws stipulate.

“The Court notes that admissibility conditions are cumulative, and as such, where any one of them has not been met, it is the entire application that cannot stand. This is the case with the present matter.

The application by Mr Rutabingwa is consequently inadmissible,” Judge Gerard Niyungeko ruled last week in Arusha, Tanzania.

Dismissal

Having served for over a year as an auditor and evaluations expert for the Ministry of Finance, Mr Rutabingwa - a Rwandan national - was fired in 2001 for illegally disclosing confidential documents.

Two years later, he filed a civil lawsuit in a Kigali court, but it was dismissed on grounds that his evidence was not well-founded.

The court however ordered government to compensate him with Rwf2.5 million (about $5000 at the time).

He rejected the ruling and appealed at the high court, which also declared his case inadmissible.

Both parties thereafter met back and forth to reach an amicable agreement out of court, but to no avail.

More than ten years later, Mr Rutabingwa brought the civil lawsuit to the Arusha-based African Court on Human and Peoples Rights in November 2014.

In his file case, he demanded a compensation of $1 million in damages for illegal dismissal, and also wanted his job back.

He told court that lack of employment forced him to sell his house to meet his needs, and wanted government to be forced to provide for his accommodation.

Claims labelled baseless

But government – represented by principal state Attorney Epimaque, Rubango Kayihura – told court that his claims were baseless, and that his refusal to appeal to the Supreme Court was in contempt of national laws.

“The requirement of exhausting local remedies is a general principle founded on the conviction that a state must be given the possibility to repair the violations of its obligations in matters of human rights through internal mechanisms prior to such violations being brought before an international body,” Principle Attorney Rubango said.

The court thereafter ruled in favour of government’s reasoning, noting that Mr Rutabingwa had failed to bring forward reasons for his refusal to first appeal at the Supreme Court.

However, the court ruled against government’s request that Mr Rutabingwa pay all costs of the trial, saying that both parties will bear their own costs.

Rwanda has a complicated history with the African Court on Human and People’s Rights.

In 2016, government filed to withdraw from the court’s declaration that enables individuals and NGOs to file lawsuits against the government, on grounds that this clause was being exploited by genocide deniers and fugitives.

Criticism

This was met with fierce criticism from both continental and regional watchdogs that deemed Rwanda's decision a setback for human rights protection.

Rwanda’ withdrawal took effect in March 2017, but all cases filed before then are to be finalized.

One of the high profile cases handled by the Arusha court involved jailed politician and government critic, Victoire Ingabire, who had a lawsuit last year ruled in her favour that government had violated her right to freedom of speech and adequate defence.

Other cases include that of genocide convict Leon Mugesera and Rwanda’s former army chief of staff Kayumba Nyamwasa who is exiled in South Africa.

The court has so far finalized four lawsuits against the Rwandan government and has six others pending.