The Applicant alleges that the Respondent’s State act of banning the use of VPN unless the users declare their VPN and all relevant information including IP address to the authority on basis of Regulation 16(2) of the Electronic and Postal Communications (Online Content) Regulations,2020 (EPC) and the Regulation violate Articles of the Treaty by restricting freedom to impart and receive information which is in contravention to the fundamental and operational principles of the treaty under Article 6(d) and7(2). It also restricts freedom of expression and the rights to social justice by imposing barriers in VPNs thus the order requiring individuals and companies in Tanzania to disclose their VPN usage and IP addresses without reasons for disclosing such personal information is an infringement to personal privacy which is contrary to principles of democracy and rule of law.

The Applicant alleges that the Respondent’s State entity, Rubavu District failed to respect the rights of its citizens, the rule of law, and good governance contrary to the provisions of Article 6(a( (b) (c), and (d), 7(2), 8(c) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community, through its action of refusing to pay back to the Applicant the compensation and damages amounting to 2,916,987USD incurred by the Applicant as a result of unlawful termination of the sale agreement on Gisenyi Market executed between the Applicant and the Respondent.

The Applicants allege that Respondent’s State action of arresting and detaining the Applicants and subsequent confiscation of their money and properties through its Investigation Bureau, on account of legitimate use of the Intervener’s prepaid card is wrongful, unlawful and amounts to cruel, inhumane, degrading treatment in contravention of the Respondent’s obligations under Articles 6(d), 7(2), 27 and 30 of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community.

The Applicant alleges that the Respondent’s State decision to arrest and detain over 100 residents for more than three months without trial, confiscating their properties and denying them bail was a violation of Articles 24, 29 and 34 of the Rwanda Constitution, Articles 6(d), 7(1) (b) and 8(1) (c) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community. Articles 3, 4, 7(1) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Articles 9, 10 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Applicant alleges that the Respondent’s State actions, decisions, directives, orders of various specified organs, agencies, officials and agents of transferring of the Applicant’s file without notice; striking out Applicant’s amended charge sheet; holding that the Applicant had no audience before the court and the decision of Uganda Communications Commission refusing to provide the Applicant with certified copies of Broadcasting Licenses for Central Broadcasting Services Limited’s radio stations; the directive by the Inspector General of Police halting Civic and Political countrywide mobilization activities of National Union Political Party and the directive by the Inspector General of Police that Uganda Police would not provide security to the Delegates Conference Forum for Democratic Change Political Party among other acts as being unlawful and infringements of the fundamental and operational principles of the EAC guaranteed under Articles 6(d) and 7(2) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community.

The Applicant alleges that the Respondent’s State act through its judiciary of rendering a ruling that struck out the Applicant’s Bill of Costs after observing unlawfully, corruptly and incompetently that the Court of Appeal has its own Deputy Registrars who hears and tax Bils of Costs arising from Court of Appeal is in contravention of Articles 6(d) and 7(d) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community.

The Applicant alleges that the Respondent’s State Parliament’s decision granting the President powers to appoint five percent 5% of three hundred and thirty-two (332) members of parliament of the National Legislative Assembly under Section 60(4) of the said National Election Act 2012 (Amendment) Act, 2023 was ultra-virus and therefore violates democratic values, rule of law, human rights and hence infringes Articles 6(d) and 7(2) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community.

The Applicant alleges that the Respondent’s State act through its judiciary of giving an adverse ruling that has denied him costs awarded to him in Nairobi Milimani High Court Misc. Ap. Civ Case No. 884 of 227 contravened Articles 6(d) and 7(2) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community.

The Applicant alleges that the Respondent’s State action of its Judiciary to sustain the death penalty does not conform with the Constitution of South Sudan and therefore violates Articles 6(d) and 7(2) of the East African Treaty. The Applicant further alleges that the action of the Respondents judiciary amounts to discrimination as the killer of his brother was acquitted of murder charges and there is a violation of the rule of law and an infringement of Article 6(d) and 7(2) of the East African EAC Treaty.

The Applicant alleges that the actions of the Respondent through its organs the National Arts Council (BASATA) and the Tanzania Communications Regulatory Authority (TCRA) of banning the dissemination of the song ‘Amkeni’ by Emmanuel Elibariki through all media outlets violates his freedom of expression and access to information in a manner that goes against the principles of democracy, rule of law, accountability enshrined in Article 6(d) of the Treaty. The Applicant allege that by restricting the song from media outlets because it critics the government, the Respondent violate Article 7(2) of the Treaty which require partner states to abide by the principles of good governance which include adherence to democracy, the rule of law, social justice and the preservation of universally accepted human rights standards.