We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Africa’s subregional courts have experienced a marked impact by international human rights law notwithstanding the fact that these courts were established primarily to support and enhance the pursuit of economic integration. This chapter argues that international human rights law has become increasingly entrenched as a substantive source of law in African subregional regimes through a combination of uncritical reception and deployment by the subregional courts relying on statements of fundamental principles contained in treaties and the acquiesce of state parties to those treaties. Analysing the practices of the East African Court of Justice and the ECOWAS Community Court of Justice as case studies, the charter demonstrates that even though the presence of international human rights law is evident in the work of Africa’s subregional courts, the impact that international rights law has made is significantly different in each regime. It is shown that the impact is more robust where the court is not constrained by jurisdictional limitations in human rights adjudication and allows standing to individuals pursuing human rights claims.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.