The Problem of Being Judged Within a Reasonable Time Under Burundian Law
Abstract
In the course of a trial, both the speed of justice and its slowness present virtues and vices that are sometimes difficult to reconcile. A dialectical conflict arises between modern currents advocating for celerity and traditionalist currents emphasizing the length and quality of trials, grounded in strict respect for the rights of the defense. In either case, the litigant’s interest is not only to obtain a fair legal decision but, above all, to obtain it within a reasonable timeframe, enabling them to fully enjoy the rights enshrined therein. This paper focuses on analyzing how the criteria for assessing reasonable time can help reconcile the demands of the right to defense with those of judicial efficiency_- an issue that often results in delays during case proceedings.. In Burundian positive law, although the Constitution enshrines the principle of the right to be tried within a reasonable time, the notion of reasonable time, as well as its assessment criteria, is not detailed in any legislative or regulatory text, nor is it enshrined in national case law. This gap sometimes leads to unreasonable delays in legal proceedings. Given the advances made by the case law of the Human Rights Committee, the European Court, and the African Court regarding reasonable time, it is more essential than ever for Burundian positive law to foster a "culture of celerity". This would entail accelerating trial proceedings by promoting these criteria for the effective management of judicial time. Furthermore, the article emphasizes the delicate balance between the speed and quality of justice, debunking the common confusion between reasonable time and the hasty administration of justice. Drawing on legal maxims, it argues that while ‘justice delayed is justice denied,’ ‘justice hurried is justice buried.’ The author introduces the idea of reconciling speed with the rights of the defense, demonstrating that expedited justice is beneficial when combined with fundamental defense rights, such as public debates and the principle of contradiction during the trial process. The article asserts that the expeditious delivery of justice, when managed prudently and reinforced by procedural safeguards, is essential for the survival of judicial proceedings. A rule of law system should prioritize efficiency without compromising quality or the rights of the defense. It criticizes unnecessary delays, advocates for practical measures to expedite civil cases, and proposes a streamlined process for legal proceedings. Ultimately, the narrative underscores the need for reasonable judicial time as a cornerstone of a just and fair society. The results of this research are derived from doctrine, the jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee, case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the African Court of Human and Peoples' Rights, as well as Burundian case law. The discussion of these results is based on a documentary methodology, analyzing legal texts, books, judgments, and rulings with the force of res judicata, along with national and international case law. This article seeks to examine the challenges and issues associated with the right to be tried within a reasonable time in Burundi. Its objectives is to analyze whether the guarantees proclaimed by the Constitution, the African Charter, and other international instruments ratified by Burundi, specifically those related to reasonable trial time, are effectively being implemented.
Downloads
Metrics
References
2. African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (1981). Adopted in Nairobi, Kenya, at the 18th Conference of the Organization of African Unity (OAU), entered into force on October 21, 1986, OAU Doc. CAB/LEG67/3 Rev.5, United Nations, Treaty Series, Vol.1520, p. 217, ratified by Burundi on 28/07/1989.
3. Amrani-Mekki Soraya (2008). ''Le principe de célérité'', Revue d'administration publique n°125.
4. Arshad Khan Kalim (2023). ''Justice Hurried is better than Justice Delayed'', Federal Law Journal (FLJ)..
5. Cholet Didier (2006). La célérité de la procédure en droit processuel, Paris, Librairie Générale de Droit et de Jurisprudence..
6. De Gaulle Charles (1970). Mémoire d'espoir- Le Renouveau, Paris, Plon.
7. Décret-loi n°1/009 portant adhésion du Burundi au Pacte international relatif aux droits civils et politiques (1990).
8. European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (2018).
9. European Convention on Human Rights (1950). Officially known as the "Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms", S.T.E., no. 5; United Nations, Treaty Series, Vol. 213, p. 222.
10. Ferrand Frédérique (2004). La procédure civile modélisée, Actes du colloque de Lyon du 12 juin 2003, Éditions juridiques et techniques.
11. Guide to article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Right to a fair trial (civil section), updated to April 30, 2021 and August 31, 2022 respectively.
12. Guinchard Serges (2004). Quelles principes pour les procès de demain, in Mélanges J.van Compernolle, Bruylant.
13. Hebraud Pierre (1936). La réforme de la procédure, LGDJ.
14. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), Concluded in New York, entry into force March 23, 1976, United Nations, Treaty Series, Vol. 999, p. 171, ratified by Burundi on March 14, 1990 (law no. 1/009 of August 16, 1990).
15. Jurisprudence of Burundian courts, Supreme Court of Burundi: RCC 11063, august 31, 2005; RAA 597, December 30, 2005; RAA 13729, December 2016; RTC 1635, March 4, 2020; Administrative Court of Bujumbura:judgment RAC 3922 in the case of KA. GB vs. the State of Burundi; Labour Court: RS 11430, January 9, 2012; High Court of Bujumbura City Hall: RC 15063, August 1, 2005.
16. Jurisprudence of European Court of Human Rights on article 6 of the ECHR, Melnyk v. Ukraine, judgment of 28 March 2006; cases Boddaert v.Belgium, 1987; Union Alimentaria sanders Sa v Spain, 1985; Cuscani v United Kingdom, 1996; Scordino v Italy; Vernillo v. France, Feb. 20, 1991; Moreiro de Azevedo v. Portugal, oct. 23, 1990; Katte Klitsche de la Grange v. Italy, oct. 27, 1994; Comingersoll S.A. v. Portugal, 2000; Frydlender v. France, 2000; Sürmeli v. Germany, 2006; Paroisse gréco-catholique Lupeni et autres v. Roumanie, 2016; Nicolae Virgiliu Tănase v. Romania, 2019; Bieliński v. Poland, 2022; Dumont v. Belgium, april 28, 2005; Hadjidjanis v. Greece judgment of april 28, 2005; Laino v. Italy, February 18, 1999.
17. Jurisprudence of Human Rights Committee, Communication n° 207/1986, Yves Morael v. France, Views adopted on 28 July 1989.
18. Jurisprudence of the American Court of Human Rights on Article 8 of the American Convention on Human Rights: Suárez-Rosero v Ecuador.
19. Jurisprudence of the Commission and African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights on Article 7 of the African Charter on Human Rights: Alex Thomas v United Republic of Tanzania, 2015; Wilfred Onyango Nganyi and 9 others v United Republic of Tanzania, 2013; case 253/02: Antonie Bissangou v. Congo, 2002; case 199/97: Odjouoriby Cossi Paul v. Benin, 1997.
20. Kuty Franklin (2006). Justice pénale et procès équitable, Notions générales, Garanties d'une bonne administration de la justice, Bruxelles, Larcier, volume 1.
21. Kuty Franklin (2006). Justice pénale et procès équitable, Exigence de délai raisonnable Présomption d'innocence Droits spécifiques du prévenu, Bruxelles, Editions Larcier, volume 2,
22. Law n° 27 on the Code of Civil Procedure, December 28, 2023.
23. Magendie Jean-Claude (2004). Célérité et qualité de la justice. La gestion du temps dans le procès. Rapport remis au Garde des sceaux en septembre 2004, La documentation française.
24. Milano Laure (2006). Le droit à un tribunal au sens de la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme, Paris, Dalloz.
25. Montesquieu (1871). De l'esprit des lois, new Edition, Paris, Garnier.
26. Nouvelle revue de droit du Burundi, April /May 2007.
27. Pradel Jean (2008). Droit pénal comparé, Dalloz, Paris.
28. Quillere-Majzoub Fabienne (1999). La défense du droit à un procès équitable, Bruylant, Bruxelles.
29. The Constitution of the Republic of Burundi (2018).
30. The Protocol to the African Charter on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights (1998).
31. Tulkens Françoise (2006). ''Le droit d'être jugé dans un délai raisonnable: les maux et les remèdes'', conference on Remèdes à la durée excessive des procédures: une nouvelle approche des obligations des Etats-membres du conseil de l'Europe, Bucarest, hôtel grand plazza.
Copyright (c) 2025 Noel Ndikumasabo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
