58 Anyangwe/Right to self-determination under the African Charter Respondent States’.34 It went on to hold that the occupation of the territories of the DRC was a flagrant violation of the right of the people of that country to self-determination. However, the Commission failed to elaborate on this curt finding. In this inter-state case, as in the case of Jawara, the term ‘people’ has the constitutional law meaning of the sovereign people of a country as a whole. 3.2 Secessionist self-determination claim 3.2.1 Front for the Liberation of the State of Cabinda v Angola (2006) Cabinda (formerly Portuguese Congo) is an oil-rich territory situated in the south-east coast of Congo Brazzaville and north of Angola proper, separated therefrom by a 60 km wide strip of Congo Kinshasa territory at the mouth of the Congo River. Under the 1933 Portuguese constitution, Cabinda and Angola were overseas provinces of Portugal but Cabinda was administered as one of the districts of Angola. Angola achieved independence from Portugal in 1975 with Cabinda as an integral part of the Angolan State. In April 1988, a movement known as Union Nationale de Libération de Cabinda filed a case in the African Commission against Angola (Communication 24/89) claiming external self-determination (independence) for the exclave of Cabinda, under article 20 of the African Charter. Angola at that time was not yet a party to the Charter, and only ratified it on 2 March 1990. The Commission simply declared the communication inadmissible. Sixteen years later, Cabinda again filed another communication against Angola: Front for the Liberation of the State of Cabinda v Angola (Cabinda case).35 The complainant alleged a denial of the right to self-determination by Angola in violation of article 20, and a violation of articles 14, 19, 21, 22 and 24 of the Charter. The complaint based on a violation of art 20 was not argued on Cabinda’s ‘political status’ or its right to statehood, independent from Angola. The complainant explicitly submitted that it did not seek a decision on political self-determination or a right to secede from Angola. It maintained that its claim was strictly restricted to a request for a decision on economic self-determination and a determination of the right of the people of Cabinda to enjoy the use of natural resources located within Angola. The complaint was thus based on the failure of the Angola state to pursue economic and social development in Cabinda, a dimension of internal self-determination. In its decision issued on 5 November 2013, the Commission held that there was no 34 35 DRC case (n 33) para 76. See also paras 68 & 77 where the Commission found the conduct of the respondent’s occupation of territories in the Complainant State ‘a flagrant violation of the rights of the peoples of the Democratic Republic of Congo to their unquestionable and inalienable right to self-determination provided for by art 20 of the African Charter’. Communication 328/06, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 54th Annual Activity Report (2013).