37. In the result, we find that the Reference was filed within time and do answer Issue No. 2 in the negative. Issue No. 3: Whether Act No. 1/26 is inconsistent with the right to an independent and impartial judicial system right to a fair trial, and therefore and the inconsistent with international instruments and/ or Articles 6(d) and 7(2) of the Treaty Applicants’Submissions: 38. In a nutshell, we understood it to be the argument for the Applicants that Articles 2, 5, 7, 40, 44, 50, 52, 73, 87 and 89 of Act No.1/26 contravene the principles of constitutionalism, human governance contention as stipulated in the Treaty. that the Respondent's Article 23(1) of the Treaty, adherence to law in the with the Treaty.’ case which Mr. hinges on Ncutiyumuheto’s the provisions interpretation, application and compliance He cited the cases of Independent Medico Plaxeda Rugumba of enjoins the Court to ‘ensure the Unit (supra) and Attorney General role in ensuring It was rights and good Legal of the Republic of Rwanda vs. (supra) to augment his submission on the court’s Partner States’ adherence to law and compliance with the Treaty. 39. It was also argued for the Applicants that Act No.1/26 contravened Article 209 of the Constitution of the Republic of Burundi, Article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human and 26 of the African Article 14(1) of the Charter on International Human and Covenant Rights, Articles 7(1) People’s on Civil Rights, all of which international instruments had been Reference No.1 5 of 2014 as well as Rights and and Political ratified by the Page 15