Upon careful consideration of this point of objection, it is our considered view, that the matters complained of are failures in a whole continuous chain of events from when the alleged violations started until the Claimant decided that the Republic of Kenya had failed to provide any remedy of the alleged violations. We find that such action or omission of a Partner State cannot be limited by mathematical computation of time.” 28. We adopt the same reasoning and agree with the Applicant that where issues in contest are criminal in nature and the action complained of is continuous (such as detention), it would be against the principles known to the rule of Law to dismiss the complaint on the basis of strict mathematical computation of time. We must also add that it is patently clear to us that the Applicant only filed this Reference when she realized that the Republic of Rwanda had failed or refused to provide any remedy for the alleged violation and she cannot now be penalized on the basis of the inaction of a Partner State. 29. The Reference, in our humble view, was within time and we shall say something about the period starting 20th August 2010 and ending on 28th January 2011, later in this Judgment. (C) WHETHER THE APPLICANT SHOULD HAVE EXHAUSTED LOCAL REMEDIES BEFORE FILING THE REFERENCE REFERENCE NO.8 OF 2010 Page 20

Select target paragraph3