Bwalya v. Zambia
Human Rights Committee
Comm. No. 314/1988, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/48/D/314/1988 (1993)

- Written by Katrina Sumner, JD
Facts
Peter Chiiko Bwalya (plaintiff) was a citizen of Zambia (defendant) who ran for a seat in Zambia’s parliament. Bwalya authored a communication alleging that his rights under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (the covenant) were violated because authorities prevented him from adequately preparing his campaign and from participating in the election. Bwalya was the chairman of a political party called the People’s Redemption Organization, and he advocated reforms related to homelessness and unemployment. Bwalya alleged that he suffered retaliation for his views in the form of threats, being fired from his job, being expelled from his home, and having his father’s pension payments halted. Bwalya was held in detention for 31 months and charged with being a member of his political party, which was regarded as illegal given that Zambia’s constitution provided only for one party. Bwalya was also charged with conspiracy to overthrow the current government. After Bwalya filed his communication with the Human Rights Committee (the committee), he was arrested and detained again. It was a year and a half before Zambia notified the committee that Bwalya had been released. However, Zambia did not provide the committee with any additional information, judicial orders, or opinions in Bwalya’s case pursuant to its obligation under Article 4(2) of the covenant’s optional protocol. Bwalya alleged violations of Articles 19 and 25 of the covenant.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 834,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.