The Community Court of Justice, ECOWAS, on 19 February 2026 delivered its judgment in case no ECW/CCJ/APP/36/24 brought by Mrs. Yayé Haby Barry over alleged violations of her fundamental rights specifically right to liberty and right to be tried within a reasonable time, as guaranteed under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. The Court held the Republic of Guinea liable for the violations and awarded damages in favour of the Guinean applicant.

Background

The Applicant, Mrs Yayé Haby Barry, a Guinean prison guard was arrested and detained following a prison escape on 15 May 2005. She submitted that she remained in detention for about a year before her acquittal by a domestic court of first instance on 15 November 2006, adding that the Respondent did not appeal the court decision.

In 2010, she filed civil proceedings seeking damages, but it was dismissed. Subsequently, she filed an appeal, which has remained pending for over 13 years. Thereafter, she filed an application before the ECOWAS Court alleging violations of her right to liberty and security of person and her right to be heard within reasonable time as well as remedy for the harm suffered.

The Respondent failed to file a Statement of Defence despite being duly served with the processes and hearing notices. The Applicant therefore filed for default judgment.

Court’s Findings

Jurisdiction and Admissibility:

The Court noted that it had jurisdiction under Article 9 (4) of its Protocol to determine allegations of human rights violations occurring within Member States. It observed that the claims relating to arbitrary detention and prolonged judicial delay fell within its human rights mandate.

The Court also noted that the matter was neither anonymous nor pending before another international court, and that the Applicant had established her status as the alleged victim. Furthermore, the pendency of a domestic proceeding does not hinder the Court’s jurisdiction. Having confirmed proper service of all processes and compliance with procedural requirements, the Court proceeded to determine the matter by default.

On the Right to Liberty:

The Court found that although the Applicant’s initial arrest had a legal basis under domestic law, her detention for approximately one year exceeded the statutory four-month limit for pre-trial detention. There was no evidence of a reasoned judicial order extending the detention or of effective judicial review. The Court held that the prolonged detention without appropriate judicial authorisation rendered the detention arbitrary and in violation of Article 6 of the African Charter.

On the Right to Be Tried Within a Reasonable Time:

The Court noted that the Applicant’s appeal which had remained pending over 13 years was excessive and inconsistent with the requirement of ‘reasonable time’ under Article 7(1)(d) of the African Charter. The Court concluded that the Respondent’s inaction undermined access to justice and effective remedy.

Court’s Decision

The Court:

• Declared that it had jurisdiction over the matter;
• Declared the case admissible;
• Found that the Respondent violated the Applicant’s right to liberty under Article 6 of the African Charter;
• Found that the Respondent violated the Applicant’s right to be tried within a reasonable time under Article 7(1)(d) of the African Charter;
• Ordered the Respondent to pay 100,000,000 (One Hundred Million) Guinean Francs to the Applicant as compensation for the violations;
• Dismissed all other claims; and
• Ordered the Respondent to bear the costs of the proceedings. Costs will be assessed by the Chief Registrar.

The judgment was delivered by a panel comprising:

•          Hon. Justice Sengu Mohamed Koroma (Presiding and Judge Rapporteur)

•          Hon. Justice Gberi-Bè Ouattara (Member)

•          Hon. Justice Edward Amoako Asante (Member)