(2018) 2 African Human Rights Yearbook 117 community, was bound by a number of international treaties requiring democratic practices, including the EAC Treaty.181 In his view, article 123 of that Treaty required the development and consolidation of democracy and the rule of law and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.182 Similarly, in Toolit,183 Judge Opio Aweri noted that aside from domestic law on elections, Uganda was bound by a number of international and regional treaties, of which the EAC Treaty was among the ‘most relevant’.184 As he had in the Akidi case above, he cited article 123 of the EAC Treaty as being especially pertinent with respect to the obligation to observe democratic practices.185 4.2.2 East African Court of Justice The case law of the East African Court of Justice (EACJ) has been cited in a number of cases, straddling human rights, constitutional and electoral law as well as civil and commercial related fields. At the same time, this reception has not been unanimous, and there are some instances in which courts have ignored invitations to consider EACJ jurisprudence. In the 2007 case of Tim Kabaza and 2 Others v Chatha Investments Ltd,186 for instance, High Court Judge Opio Aweri relied on the EACJ decision in Prof Peter Anyang Nyong’o & others v The Attorney General of Kenya and Others187 as authority for the propositions that: i) temporary injunctions were discretionary orders and thus required the careful and judicious consideration of all aspects of the case; ii) flexibility was to be preferred rather than hard and fast rules; and iii) courts should avoid determining issues that were the subject of the main case.188 Further reliance on EACJ jurisprudence occurred in the two earlier referenced High Court decisions also rendered by Judge Opio Aweri. In the Akidi case189 in particular, Judge Opio Aweri stressed the importance of EACJ case law. Counsel for the first respondent had cited the Anyang’ Nyongo case and urged the Court to be guided by it. In response, counsel for the petitioner had argued that the case was not binding on the court, but was only persuasive at best. In rejecting the latter view, Judge Opio Aweri observed that Uganda, as part of the community of nations, was bound by a corpus of relevant treaty law, 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 At 5-6. At 6. n 67. At 7. As above. High Court Misc Appln No.745 of 2007, arising from High Court Civil Suit No.489 of 2007 (decision of Judge Rubby Aweri Opio). East African Court of Justice Case Ref 1 of 2006. At 4 (the Court should bear in mind the following guidelines’). n 64.