Wakilii

Minister of Justice of the Democratic Republic of Congo v Attorney General of the Republic of Rwanda (Consolidated Applications Numbers 4, 5, 15 and 16 (Arising from Reference No. 33 of 2023 and Application No. 13 of 2023))

East African Court of Justice · [2025] EACJ 12 Applications Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Consolidated applications arising from Reference No. 33 of 2023 and Application No. 13 of 2023, determining preliminary objections and applications to strike out pleadings and to admit translated documents and new evidence
Decision
Applications 15 and 16 granted; Applications 4 and 5 dismissed; preliminary objections dismissed; matter to proceed to hearing on merits

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 Court held that it has jurisdiction ratione materiae to determine the Reference as the impugned acts occurred after the Applicant joined the Community. The two-month limitation in Article 30(2) does not apply to References by Partner States under Article 28. The Court dismissed applications to strike out pleadings for containing untranslated documents, finding the defect cured by subsequent filing of translated documents. Leave was granted to file translated documents and new evidence in the interest of substantive justice.

Outcome

Applications 15 and 16 granted; Applications 4 and 5 dismissed; preliminary objections dismissed; matter to proceed to hearing on merits

Facts

The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) filed Reference No. 33 of 2023 and Application No. 13 of 2023 against Rwanda alleging acts of aggression in Eastern DRC. DRC joined the East African Community in July 2022. Some documents filed in support were not translated into English. Rwanda filed Applications 4 and 5 seeking to strike out the pleadings for containing untranslated documents and for being scandalous, frivolous or vexatious. Rwanda also raised preliminary objections that the Reference was time barred and that the Court lacked jurisdiction. DRC subsequently filed Applications 15 and 16 seeking leave to file translated documents and newly discovered evidence. The Court consolidated all four applications for hearing.

Issues

  1. Whether the affidavits and documents filed in support of the Reference and Application were properly authenticated.
  2. Whether the Reference is time barred on the ground that it refers to events preceding the Applicant's admission to the East African Community.
  3. Whether the two-month limitation period in Article 30(2) of the Treaty applies to References filed by Partner States under Article 28.
  4. Whether the Court should strike out pleadings and documents for containing untranslated documents in violation of Article 46 and Rule 11 of the Rules.
  5. Whether the Court should grant leave to the Applicant to file translated documents and newly discovered evidence.

Orders

  • This Court possesses requisite jurisdiction to determine Reference No. 33 of 2023 on its merit.
  • Reference No. 33 of 2023 is not time barred.
  • Application No. 4 of 2024 and Application No. 5 of 2024 are hereby dismissed.
  • Application No. 15 of 2024 and Application No. 16 of 2024 are allowed.
  • The Respondent is allowed 45 days within which to file Responses to the Amended Statement of Reference and the Amended Notice of Motion.
  • Each Party to bear their own costs at this stage.

Rules and key headnotes

Treaty Interpretation — Non-Retroactivity — Jurisdiction Ratione Materiae
A treaty cannot be applied retrospectively unless a different intention appears from the treaty or is otherwise established. The East African Court of Justice has no jurisdiction to interrogate events that took place before a Partner State's accession to the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community.
Treaty Interpretation — Limitation Periods — Article 28 vs Article 30
The two-month limitation period specified in Article 30(2) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community applies only to references by natural and legal persons and does not apply to references brought by Partner States under Article 28 of the Treaty.
Language of Court — Untranslated Documents — Curable Defect
The filing of documents in a language other than the official language of the Court is a curable defect. Where the defect is subsequently rectified by filing translated documents before hearing, the Court will not strike out the pleadings, particularly where the interest of substantive justice so requires.
Striking Out — Scandalous, Frivolous or Vexatious Pleadings
A document filed in a language other than the official language of the Court does not, by that fact alone, render it scandalous, frivolous or vexatious within the meaning of Rule 47 of the East African Court of Justice Rules. The terms scandalous, frivolous and vexatious have specific legal meanings and must not be used loosely.
Jurisdiction — Ratione Materiae, Ratione Personae, Ratione Temporis
To succeed on a claim of lack of jurisdiction in the East African Court of Justice, a party must demonstrate the absence of any of the three types of jurisdiction: ratione personae (jurisdiction on account of the person concerned), ratione materiae (jurisdiction over the matter involved), and ratione temporis (jurisdiction on account of the time element).
Discretion of Court — Substantive Justice — Rule 4
The Court has discretion under Rule 4 of the East African Court of Justice Rules to allow the filing of documents and evidence late, including substantive pleadings, where the interest of substantive justice so requires. The greatest commandment and biggest objective of the Court is to deliver justice.

Legislation cited (10)

  • 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 28
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 30
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 46
  • East African Court of Justice Rules 2019 Rule 4
  • East African Court of Justice Rules 2019 Rule 11
  • East African Court of Justice Rules 2019 Rule 47
  • East African Court of Justice Rules 2019 Rule 52
  • East African Court of Justice Rules 2019 Rule 127

Cases cited (13)

  • Rashid Salim Ady and 39,999 Others v Attorney General of the Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar and 2 Others (EACJ Reference No. 9 of 2016)
  • Juba Airport City Park Ltd v Attorney General of the Republic of South Sudan (EACJ Reference No. 17 of 2020)
  • Emmanuel Mwakisha Miawasi & Others v Attorney General of the Republic of Kenya (EACJ Reference No. 2 of 2010)
  • Alcon International Limited v Standard Chartered Bank of Uganda & 2 Others (EACJ Appeal No. 3 of 2013)
  • Kiir Chol Deng v Attorney General of the Republic of South Sudan (EACJ Reference No. 4 of 2018)
  • Eric Kabalisa Makala v Attorney General of the Republic of Rwanda (EACJ Reference No. 1 of 2017)
  • Joseph Kipkoechi Sigei v Secretary General of the East African Community (EACJ Claim No. 1 of 2018)
  • Angella Amudo v Secretary General of the East African Community (EACJ Appeal No. 4 of 2014)
  • East African Centre for Trade and Law v Attorney General of Uganda & Others (EACJ Reference No. 9 of 2012)
  • Attorney General of Kenya v Independent Medical Legal Unity (EACJ Appeal No. 1 of 2014)
  • Attorney General of the Republic of Burundi v Secretary General of the East African Community (EACJ Appeal No. 2 of 2019)
  • Attorney General of the Republic of Rwanda v Union Trade Centre Limited (EACJ Appeal No. 2 of 2018)
  • Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda v East African Law Society & Another (EACJ Appeal No. 1 of 2013)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Minister of Justice of the Democratic Republic of Congo v Attorney General of the Republic of Rwanda (Consolidated Applications Numbers 4, 5, 15 and 16 (Arising from Reference No. 33 of 2023 and Application No. 13 of 2023)) [2025] EACJ 12 (
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.