116 Kabumba/Application of African Union (human rights) law in Uganda litigation arising from the collapse of the original Community in 1977.174 4.2.1 East African Community Treaty The Treaty establishing the East African Community (the EAC Treaty) has been relied upon in three cases, all filed in 2011. In Awadh,175 counsel for the respondent urged the Constitutional Court to take into account the fact that, in terms of article 124 of the EAC Treaty, the member states of the Community had agreed to cooperate in respect of the maintenance of peace and security in the region. In particular, the member states had committed, under article 124(5) of the EAC Treaty, to cooperate in the fight against cross border crime, and to extend mutual assistance in criminal matters including through the arrest and repatriation of fugitives as well as through exchanging information relating to national frameworks for fighting crime. In upholding this contention, the Constitutional Court took special note of the fact that the EAC Treaty had been domesticated by Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania.176 In the case of Uganda, the Court observed that Parliament had passed the East African Community Treaty Act of 2002, which had entered into force on 15 January 2005 by the terms of Statutory Instrument No. 29 of 2005 - The East African Community Act (Commencement) Instrument, 2005.177 The Court also took note of, and relied upon, article 124 of the EAC Treaty, which had been stressed by counsel for the respondent.178 On these bases, the Court was of the view that neither the Ugandan Police nor the Director of Public Prosecutions had violated the Constitution by receiving and prosecuting the petitioners since, from the facts, there had been legitimate cooperation between Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania under the terms of the EAC Treaty.179 Further, in Akidi,180 Judge Opio Aweri rendered a vigorously proEAC decision. He noted that Uganda, as a member of the international 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 See, for instance, James Bahinguza and Edward Grace Lubega (on behalf of 622 other former employees of the defunct East African Airways) v Attorney General C.A Misc Appln 269 of 2013, arising from H.C Misc Appln 448 of 2009, itself arising from H.C Misc Appln 763 of 2003 and High Court Civil Suit No.1010 of 1996 (seeking terminal benefits arising from the collapse of the East African Community); Administrator General v Kakooza Umaru and Stanbic Bank High Court Misc Appln 11 of 2017, arising from EMA 1381 of 2016, itself arising from High Court Civil Appeal 16 of 2009 (in which the respondent sued to access benefits accruing to his late father, arising from service to the defunct East African Community); JL Okello v Uganda National Examinations Board Supreme Court Civil Appeal 12 of 1987 (in which one issue related to whether the Uganda National Examinations Board, as successor to the East Africa Examination Council, had a subsisting claim to the land in dispute). n 37. At 71. At 71-72. At 72. As above. n 64.