Katabazi & 21 Others vs. Secretary General of the East African Community & Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda EACJ Ref. No. 1 of 2007. 18. Secondly, it was argued for the Respondent that this Court does not have jurisdiction to entertain States’ national purposes laws, prayers for the annulment therefore the is restricted to Prayers Reference, Court's of Partner jurisdiction for present (a), (b), (c), (d), (f) and subject to satisfactory proof thereof. (g) of the Mr. Kayobera cited Articles 23, 27 and 30 of the Treaty in support of his case, as well as the cases Republic of Hilaire Ndayizamba of Burundi_& Community Francois EACJ vs. Ref. Attorney vs. Secretary No. General 3 of 2012 General Attorney of the General of the and East Professor Republic of Secretary General of the East African Community of the African Nyamoya Burundi EACJ & Ref. No. 8 of 2011. 19. With regard to the issue of limitation of time, it was contention that the promulgation 1/31 such were time barred. that the Applicants’ challenge filed had of the said laws was by 15" any challenge to Act No. November 2014 been filed on 17" November 2014. 1/31 1/26 and Act No. Learned Counsel argued that, having been promulgated on 15" September 2014, been dates of Act No. Mr. Kayobera’s been promulgated on but the 1/26 should have present Reference had Similarly, he argued that Act No. 31*t December 2013 therefore the present Reference was filed well beyond the time stipulated in Article 30(2) of the Treaty. Medico EACJ Legal Ref. Mr. Kayobera cited the cases of Independent Unit vs Attorney General of the Republic of Kenya No. 3 Professor Nyamoya Reference No.1 5 of 2014 of 2010, Hilaire Ndayizamba (supra) and (supra) in support of his argument. Page 7