Wakilii

Democratic Party v Secretary General of the East African Community and Ors. (Reference 2 of 2012)

East African Court of Justice · [2013] EACJ 135 · 2013 Reference Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Reference to the East African Court of Justice challenging Partner States' failure to deposit declarations accepting jurisdiction of the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights
Decision
Reference dismissed with no order as to costs

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The East African Court of Justice held that it has jurisdiction to interpret and apply the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community but cannot interpret obligations created by other international instruments such as the African Charter and its Protocol. The Court found that Article 34(6) of the Protocol to the African Charter leaves the timing of declarations accepting the African Court's jurisdiction to the sole discretion of State Parties, with no mandatory timeframe. The failure to deposit such declarations does not violate the EAC Treaty. The Reference was dismissed, with each party bearing its own costs.

Outcome

Reference dismissed with no order as to costs

Facts

The Democratic Party, a Ugandan political organization, filed a Reference challenging the failure of Uganda, Kenya, Rwanda, and Burundi to deposit declarations under Article 34(6) of the Protocol to the African Charter, which would allow individuals and NGOs direct access to the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights. All four states had ratified the Protocol but had not made the optional declaration. During proceedings, Rwanda deposited its declaration on 22 January 2013, and the Reference against it was withdrawn. The Applicant argued that the failure to deposit declarations violated the EAC Treaty's provisions on good governance, rule of law, and human rights. The Respondents contended that the Court lacked jurisdiction to interpret the Protocol and that no timeframe existed for depositing declarations.

Issues

  1. Whether the Court has jurisdiction to entertain this Reference.
  2. Whether the issues as presented are justiciable.
  3. Whether the Application discloses a cause of action against the 1st and 4th Respondents.
  4. Whether the Applicant has locus standi to present the Reference.
  5. Whether the delay by the 2nd to 5th Respondents to deposit their respective declarations is a violation of Articles 5, 6, 7, 8(1)(c), 126 and 130 of the Treaty; Articles 1(2), 7, 13, 26, 62, 65 and 66 of the African Charter on Human and People's Rights and Articles 1, 3, 5, and 34 of the Protocol.
  6. Whether the 1st Respondent has a duty under the Treaty, the Charter or the Protocol to compel and/or supervise the 2nd, 3rd and 5th Respondents to deposit declarations under Article 34(6) of the Protocol.
  7. Whether the parties are entitled to the remedies sought.

Orders

  • Reference dismissed.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Jurisdiction of the East African Court of Justice — Interpretation of the EAC Treaty
The East African Court of Justice has jurisdiction to interpret and apply the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community under Articles 23, 27 and 30, but cannot interpret obligations created by other international instruments such as the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights and its Protocol.
Justiciability — Political Questions Doctrine
Where parties agree that a reference raises triable issues based on provisions of the EAC Treaty, the Court must proceed to determine those issues on their merits and cannot decline jurisdiction on the ground that the issues involve political questions, provided the Court has jurisdiction under the Treaty.
Treaty Interpretation — Vienna Convention Principles
An international treaty must be interpreted in good faith, in accordance with the ordinary meaning of its terms in their context, and in light of the object and purpose of the treaty, as provided by Article 31(1) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
Access to Regional Human Rights Courts — Optional Declarations
Where a Protocol to a human rights treaty provides that State Parties may make a declaration accepting the competence of a regional court to receive cases from individuals and NGOs 'at the time of ratification or any time thereafter', the timing of such declaration is left to the sole discretion of the State Party, and no obligation to deposit the declaration expeditiously or by a certain date can be implied.
Good Governance Obligations — Scope of Treaty Commitments
A Partner State's failure to deposit a declaration under Article 34(6) of the Protocol to the African Charter does not constitute a violation of Articles 6(d) and 7(2) of the EAC Treaty relating to good governance, democracy, rule of law and human rights, where the Protocol itself leaves the timing of such declaration to the State's sole discretion.

Legislation cited (35)

  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 5
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 6
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 6(d)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 7(2)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 8(1)(c)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 11(3)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 23
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 27
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 27(1)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 29
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 30
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 67
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 67(3)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 71
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 126
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 130
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 130(1)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 130(2)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 130(4)
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People's Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and People's Rights Article 5
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People's Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and People's Rights Article 5(3)
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People's Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and People's Rights Article 34(6)
  • African Charter on Human and People's Rights Article 1
  • African Charter on Human and People's Rights Article 2
  • African Charter on Human and People's Rights Article 7
  • African Charter on Human and People's Rights Article 13
  • African Charter on Human and People's Rights Article 26
  • African Charter on Human and People's Rights Article 62
  • African Charter on Human and People's Rights Article 65
  • African Charter on Human and People's Rights Article 66
  • Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969 Article 31(1)
  • Political Parties and Organizations Act 2005
  • Constitution of the Republic of Kenya Article 2(5)
  • Constitution of the Republic of Kenya Article 2(6)
  • Constitution of the Republic of Kenya Article 10

Cases cited (7)

  • Mtikila & Others v Attorney General of the United Republic of Tanzania (Reference No. 2 of 2007)
  • Owners of Motor Vessel 'Lillian S' v Caltex Oil (Kenya) Ltd [1989] KLR 1
  • Modern Holdings Ltd (EA) Ltd v Kenya Ports Authority (Reference No. 1 of 2008)
  • Rugumba v Attorney General of Rwanda (Reference No. 8 of 2010)
  • Michelo Yogogambaye vs. Senegal File No.001/2008
  • Auto Garage v Motokov No. 3 [1971] EA 514
  • Ochieng S. C. Peter & 5 Others vs. President General Democratic Party Misc. Cause No. 217/2008

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Democratic Party v Secretary General of the East African Community and Ors. (Reference 2 of 2012) [2013] EACJ 135 (29 November 2013)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.