rather it is a situation in which one’s right of liberty stands removed. It is a constant state of affairs, that is to say, a continuing deprivation of a person’s liberty. We were invited by Counsel for the 3rd Respondent to interpret Article 30 (2) of the Treaty in accordance with the provisions of Article 31 (1) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. The Article provides that: “..a Treaty shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning given to the terms of the Treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose.” We have given careful thought and consideration to the import of Article 30 (2) of the Treaty. We are of the decided view that its object and purpose could not have been to deny the people in East Africa the right to challenge continuing Treaty infringements of which they are victims just because it is over two months since such infringements started. In Independent Medical Legal Unit vs The Attorney General of Kenya and 4 Others (supra) this Court held, in sum, that where matters complained of are failures in a whole continuous chain of events from when the alleged violations started until a claimant decides that a Respondent has failed to provide any remedy for the alleged violations, then such action or omission of a Partner State cannot be limited by mathematical computation of time. Counsel for the 3rd Respondent attempted to distinguish this case from the present Application. We are respectfully unable to find the distinction he laboured to establish. The issues whether or not the Applicants were abducted and surrendered to Uganda illegally and whether or not the Republic of Uganda failed to provide a remedy are matters for the merits of the case. In our considered view, the violations complained of do not constitute an act, rather, it is our finding that they constitute a continuous chain of acts the occurrence of which the Applicants could not and cannot, until now, append a specific hour, day and month. For instance, while an unlawful arrest can be time specific an unlawful detention continues to be an unlawful act on each succeeding day until it is stopped. 8