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