and 130 of the Treaty; Articles 1(2), 7, 13, 26, 62, 65, and 66 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Establishment of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (the Protocol) 53. This issue forms the substratum of the Reference and the Respondents have urged the point that whether or not this Court has jurisdiction to determine the issue, there is no time frame for them to deposit their declarations under Article 34(6) of the Protocol and the issue of delay or inaction does not thereby arise. 54. The Applicant has however framed the issue as a wider matter of access to justice and that the delay aforesaid is a violation of the principles governing the achievement of the objectives of the East African Community. Of interest is the reliance placed on the decision of the African Court in Michelo Yogogambaye vs. Senegal File No.001/2008 to show that unless the declarations are deposited, then like Yogogambaye, the right of access to the African Court would continue to be curtailed. In that case, the African Court held that since the Republic of Senegal had not deposited a declaration under Article 34(6) of the Protocol, then the Court could not entertain a case of alleged human rights violation by any NGO or individual from Senegal. 55. The starting point of the determination of this issue must be a resolution of the question whether this Court can properly delve into obligations created on the Respondents by other international instruments. We have elsewhere above said something about the issue and in that regard, the answer must be an emphatic NO. 56. This Court can only “interpret” and “apply” the Treaty under Article 27 and in doing so, adherence to law in the interpretation and application of and compliance with “the Treaty” shall be its guiding principle under Article 23. Further, in doing so, it can only inquire into “the legality of any Act, regulation, directive, decision or action of a Partner State or an institution 25 | P a g e