Masenge v A.G. of Republic of Burundi (Reference 9 of 2012)
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 determine whether a Partner State's actions infringe Treaty provisions on good governance and rule of law. The Court found that the Republic of Burundi's failure to protect the applicant's registered land ownership rights violated Articles 6(d) and 7(2) of the EAC Treaty, which require adherence to good governance, rule of law, and protection of human rights. However, the Court declined to grant orders for demolition or restitution, holding these fall outside its jurisdiction.
Outcome
Declaration granted that occupation of applicant's land is unlawful and infringes Treaty; orders for demolition and restitution refused as outside Court's jurisdiction
Facts
The applicant held a registered land title for 24 hectares in Gihanga Commune, Bubanza Province, Burundi, issued by the Registrar of Land Titles on 9 October 2009. His land was occupied and exploited by local officials including the Mayor of Gihanga Commune and supporters. The applicant complained to the Minister of Home Affairs on 12 March 2012 seeking restoration of his possession, but received no response after the three-month legal deadline elapsed. The applicant then filed a reference to the East African Court of Justice alleging that the Government of Burundi's failure to protect his property rights violated the EAC Treaty provisions on good governance and rule of law.
Issues
- Whether the Court has jurisdiction to entertain the Reference.
- Whether the failure by the Minister of Home Affairs to order the demolition and/or stop all construction on the Applicant's land is an infringement of Articles 3(3)(b), 6(d) and 7(2) of the Treaty.
- Whether the Applicant is entitled to the orders sought.
Orders
- A declaration that the occupation and exploitation of the Applicant's property is unlawful and is an infringement of Article 6(d) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community.
- Prayers (b), (c) and (d) disallowed.
- Applicant awarded half of the taxed costs to be borne by the Respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (18)
- Treaty Establishing the East African Community Article 3(3)(b)
- Treaty Establishing the East African Community Article 6(d)
- Treaty Establishing the East African Community Article 7(2)
- Treaty Establishing the East African Community Article 8(4)
- Treaty Establishing the East African Community Article 23(1)
- Treaty Establishing the East African Community Article 27(1)
- Treaty Establishing the East African Community Article 30(1)
- Treaty Establishing the East African Community Article 30(2)
- East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure Rule 1(2)
- East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure Rule 24
- East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure Rule 41
- East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure Rule 53
- East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure Rule 63(1)
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 1
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 2
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 14
- Burundi Land Act 2011 Article 317
- Constitution of the Republic of Burundi Article 36
Cases cited (9)
- Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda & Another v Omar Awadh & 6 Others (EACJ Appeal No. 2 of 2012)
- Independent Medical Unit v Attorney General of Kenya & 4 Others (EACJ Reference No. 3 of 2010)
- East African Center for Trade Policy and Law v Secretary General of the EAC (EACJ Reference No. 9 of 2012)
- Attorney General of Rwanda v Plaxeda Rugumba (EACJ Appeal No. 1 of 2012)
- James Katabazi & 21 Others v Secretary General of EAC & Attorney General of Uganda (EACJ Reference No. 1 of 2007)
- Peter Anyang' Nyong'o & Others v Attorney General of Kenya & Others (EACJ Reference No. 1 of 2006)
- Samuel Mukira Muhochi v Attorney General of Uganda (EACJ Reference No. 5 of 2011)
- Ddungu v Marc Widmer & Another (Civil Appeal No. 38 of 2009)
- Festus Mwanzi Lonzi v Roseline Muthoni Muburu (Environmental & Land Case No. 606 of 2011)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.