005051 123. The Respondent State submitted that the Applicant only alluded to the bias on the part of Justice Dotse, noting that the judgment that the Applicant complained about was unanimously rendered by all eleven judges, including eight judges of the Ordinary Bench of Supreme Court. The Respondent also contends that the judgment of the Ordinary Bench of the Supreme Court was mostly in favour of the Applicant. kkKk 124. The Court observes from the record and it is not in contention between the Parties that Justice Dotse in his concurring opinion at the Ordinary Bench referred to the Applicant as having formed an alliance with another party, Waterville Holding Ltd to “create, loot and share the resources of the country as if a brigade had been set up for such an enterprise.” and further referred to the Applicant as being at the centre of “the infamous Woyome 125. The issue for determination a perception of bias and payment scandal’. is thus whether the remarks of Justice Dotse disclose in light of the circumstances, call into question the impartiality of the Review Bench of the Supreme Court as a whole. 126. According to the Dictionnaire de Droit International Public, impartiality signifies the absence of bias, prejudice on the part of a judge, referee or expert in dealings with parties appearing before him.”*4 127. The Court notes that according to the Commentary on the Bangalore Principle of Judicial Conduct; “A judge’s personal values, philosophy, or beliefs about the law may not constitute bias. The fact that a judge has a general opinion about a legal or *4 Dictionnaire de droit international public, Sous la direction de Jean Salmon, Bruyant, Bruxelles, 2001, at 562. See also Application No. 003/2014. Judgment of 24/11/2017, Ingabire Victoire Umunoza Vv. Republic of Rwanda, §103 and 104 and Black's Law Dictionary (27 ed. 1910).