Communication 431/12 – Thomas Kwoyelo v. Uganda laws or procedures to vindicate itself from its treaty obligations. 48 The domestication of the Rome Statute, while a commendable measure, cannot justify the differential treatment. The domestication of the Statute is a measure that facilitates domestic application and enforcement of the provisions of the Rome Statute, not a measure marking the commencement of the obligations of a state under the Statute. 192. Accordingly, since Uganda assumed such obligations under the Rome Statute since 2002, that is, the year it ratified the Statute, the DPP should have also refused the amnesty applications of the two Brigadiers in order to try them for serious violations of human rights. But the DPP did not try the two Brigadiers, therefore, the enactment of the Rome Statute Act is not a convincing reason to justify the differential treatment. 193. The third ground upon which the Respondent State justifies or explains its differential treatment is that at the time of the Victim’s arrest in 2009 many people were ready and willing to testify against him as a result of the establishment of relative peace in Northern Uganda and the return of those people that were sheltered in IDP camps. And the Respondent argues that it was not possible to use such witness evidence to prosecute those who had already been granted amnesty in the past owing to lack of witness evidence. 194. However, the Respondent has not proffered any proof showing that investigations were indeed conducted against some amnesty applicants suspected of committing serious human rights violations but were closed for lack of witness evidence. No report of police investigation or report by the DPP were adduced to such effect. In the absence of such proof, the Commission is left with no option but to find that the availability or otherwise of witnesses is not persuasive enough to justify differential treatment. 48 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969, Article 27. 52 62nd Ordinary Session, 25 April – 9 July 2018