The Applicant alleges that the Respondent’s State decision through unlawful adverse Judgment rendered by the Hon. Mr Justice G.M.A Ongondo on the 5^th June 2024 in Homabay ELC Petition NO.12 of 2021 against the petitioners therein namely LILIAN ACHIENG ODIWUOR, BEATRICE ATIENO OCHIENG & ISAIAH AGWENGE ODERA in HOMABAY ELC PETITION NO. 12 OF 2012 is in contravention of Article 6(d) and 7(2) of East African Treaty for Establishment of the East African Community.

The Applicant alleges that the Respondent’s State failure and/or refusal to apply the correct interpretation to two controversial terms that appear in the East African Community Rules of Origin to wit, “Wholly produced” and “Country of Origin” and interpreted the terms in ways that not only violate the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community but afortiori, completely subvert the philosophies and ideals of the East African Community.

The Applicant alleges that the Respondent’s State act/decision through an unlawful adverse Advisory that was rendered at Nairobi on 31^st May 2024 by the Supreme Court of Kenya in Reference No. E001 of 2022 whose net-sum negative effects is to constrict and limit the jurisdiction, powers and authority of the East African Court of Justice and thereby threatens the validity and stigmatizes all the pending References which the Applicant herein has so far lodged with the East African Court of Justice and thereby contravening Articles 6(d) and 7(2) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community.

The Applicant alleges that the act of the Respondent appointing Mr. Mukasa Tom Bukenya to the position of Executive Secretary a position that the Applicant was holding for a fixed term of five years that had not yet expired with 8 months to go was an infringement of the fundamental principle of good governance enshrined in Articles 6(d),7(1),7(2) and 8(1) (c)of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community.

The Applicants allege that the action of Respondent’s State judicial organ issuing an order prohibiting and restraining the convening of an extraordinary general meeting by the Uganda Law Society to discuss the alleged judicial misconduct, incompetence, bias, irregularities, and illegalities of his lordship Byaruhanga Jesse Rugyema was a violation of the guaranteed rights of the Community under Articles 6(d) and 7(2) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community.

The Applicant alleges that the Respondent had arranged training in partnership with International Labor Organization (ILO) from 7^th to 10th May 2024 in Bujumbura on coordination of social security benefits in the East African Community Common Market whereby the Applicant was one of the attendees sent by the Minister of Justice but sooner after the commencement of the training the Applicant was deprived of his allowance rights contrary to the EAC Rules and Regulations and therefore violating Article 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 of illegally entering into an oil-backed loan agreement where a private foreign entity from Dubai in the United Arab Emirates by the name of Hamad bin Khalifa Department of Projects (HBK DOP) intends to lend the government of the Respondent’s State the amount of 12 Billion Euro in exchange for oil in an arrangement that may last for 20 years a few years after the respondent state runs out of oil is a violation of the fundamental and operational principles of the community guaranteed under Article 6(d) and 7(2) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community.

The Applicant alleges that the two decisions of the Respondent’s State High Court (Criminal Division) in Miscellaneous Applications No. 52 and 93 of 2024 both arising from Criminal Session Kase No. 100 of 2024 Molly Katanga v. Uganda that denied Molly Katanga bail whereas her sureties “appeared substantial” was unlawful and is an infringement of Articles 6(d), 7(2) and 8(1)(c) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community.

The Applicant alleges that the Respondent’s State acts of its judicial arm unfairly conducting a trial in a suit involving Balikeda Fred and the Respondent State where it granted an eviction order from land and a demolition order of Balikeda Fred’s property to pave the way for the Total Energies EP Uganda’s implementation of the Tilenga Oil Projects and the unlawful eviction process violated the fundamental and operational principles of the community guaranteed under Articles 6(d) and 7(2) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African community.

The Applicants allege that the Respondent’s State act of issuing an illegal notice to vacate through the Kilimanjaro Airport Development Authority and illegally evicting them from land adjacent to Kilimanjaro International Airport that they have legally and rightfully possessed since 1965 is a violation of the fundamental and operational principles of the community guaranteed under Articles 6(d) and 7(2) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African community.