LCP4807
Assignment 2
Semester 2 2025
Due 18 September 2025
,LCP4807
Assignment 2
Semester 2 2025
DUE 18 September 2025
Legal Opinion: Advising MADP on Proceedings Against the Republic of Kamarara
Before the Human Rights Committee
I. Introduction
This legal opinion assesses the feasibility of the Movement Against Death Penalty
(MADP), an international non-governmental organization, initiating proceedings before
the United Nations Human Rights Committee (HRC) on behalf of Mr. Mbhekwe, a
Kamararan national sentenced to death under a mandatory capital punishment regime.
The Republic of Kamarara is a State Party to the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights (ICCPR) and its First and Second Optional Protocols.
Mr. Mbhekwe contends that the mandatory death penalty imposed upon him for murder
violates his constitutional rights under Kamararan law and international human
rights obligations under the ICCPR. This opinion critically evaluates:
• The procedural admissibility of the communication;
• The substantive human rights violations engaged;
• The potential remedies the HRC may recommend.
The analysis draws on the ICCPR, HRC jurisprudence, and comparative international
legal standards.
, II. Procedural Admissibility Before the HRC
For a communication to be considered by the HRC under the First Optional Protocol,
several procedural requirements must be satisfied. These ensure respect for state
sovereignty and the proper functioning of the HRC’s quasi-judicial mechanisms.
A. Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies
Legal Standard:
Under Article 2 of the First Optional Protocol, complainants must exhaust “all
available domestic remedies.” This requirement reflects subsidiarity, obliging national
jurisdictions to first redress alleged violations (see HRC General Comment No. 31, para.
15).
Factual Application:
Mr. Mbhekwe’s legal trajectory demonstrates full exhaustion:
• High Court Conviction (15 June 2017): Convicted of murder and sentenced to
death under Section 14 of the Criminal and Other Offences Act 15 of 1939.
• Supreme Court of Appeal (15 May 2018): Appeal dismissed on both conviction
and sentence.
• Constitutional Court (19 June 2019): Upheld both the conviction and
constitutionality of the mandatory death penalty.
Conclusion:
All effective domestic remedies have been pursued to finality. The exhaustion
requirement is satisfied, allowing for admissibility under international law.
Assignment 2
Semester 2 2025
Due 18 September 2025
,LCP4807
Assignment 2
Semester 2 2025
DUE 18 September 2025
Legal Opinion: Advising MADP on Proceedings Against the Republic of Kamarara
Before the Human Rights Committee
I. Introduction
This legal opinion assesses the feasibility of the Movement Against Death Penalty
(MADP), an international non-governmental organization, initiating proceedings before
the United Nations Human Rights Committee (HRC) on behalf of Mr. Mbhekwe, a
Kamararan national sentenced to death under a mandatory capital punishment regime.
The Republic of Kamarara is a State Party to the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights (ICCPR) and its First and Second Optional Protocols.
Mr. Mbhekwe contends that the mandatory death penalty imposed upon him for murder
violates his constitutional rights under Kamararan law and international human
rights obligations under the ICCPR. This opinion critically evaluates:
• The procedural admissibility of the communication;
• The substantive human rights violations engaged;
• The potential remedies the HRC may recommend.
The analysis draws on the ICCPR, HRC jurisprudence, and comparative international
legal standards.
, II. Procedural Admissibility Before the HRC
For a communication to be considered by the HRC under the First Optional Protocol,
several procedural requirements must be satisfied. These ensure respect for state
sovereignty and the proper functioning of the HRC’s quasi-judicial mechanisms.
A. Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies
Legal Standard:
Under Article 2 of the First Optional Protocol, complainants must exhaust “all
available domestic remedies.” This requirement reflects subsidiarity, obliging national
jurisdictions to first redress alleged violations (see HRC General Comment No. 31, para.
15).
Factual Application:
Mr. Mbhekwe’s legal trajectory demonstrates full exhaustion:
• High Court Conviction (15 June 2017): Convicted of murder and sentenced to
death under Section 14 of the Criminal and Other Offences Act 15 of 1939.
• Supreme Court of Appeal (15 May 2018): Appeal dismissed on both conviction
and sentence.
• Constitutional Court (19 June 2019): Upheld both the conviction and
constitutionality of the mandatory death penalty.
Conclusion:
All effective domestic remedies have been pursued to finality. The exhaustion
requirement is satisfied, allowing for admissibility under international law.
