decisions are final, are immediately enforceable notwithstanding any appeal and in
any event that any such appeal is to a non-existent Special court.
6. Secondly, that the Commission is lacking in independence because its members are
appointed by the President of the Republic of Burundi and act under his direct
supervision and report directly to him on the sensitive issue of land.
7. Thirdly, the proceedings of the Commission do not respect the right to legal
representation and that advocates are barred from appearing before it. The net
effect of adoption of such a procedure is that the right to a fair trial is negated, so the
Applicants argue.
8. Fourthly, that although the Commission is a purely administrative organ, its creation
is a violation of the doctrine of separation of powers and has allowed the Executive
to intrude into space reserved for the Judiciary and thereby unlawfully substitute
itself for the judiciary. In addition, Mr. Nshimirimana stated, on this aspect of the
case, that the establishment of the Commission has led to a duplication of regimes
as some of the land disputes pending before courts of law are also presented for
determination by the Commission, thus creating confusion as to which regime
supersedes the other.
9. Fifthly, that the actions of the Government of the Republic of Burundi in setting up
the Commission is a breach of the fundamental and operational principles of the
Treaty including the Rule of Law, Good Governance and the principles of Human
Rights and therefore pending the hearing and determination of Reference No. 2 of
2014, interim reliefs as set out above should be granted to forestall any further
alleged suffering by real and potential victims of the Commission’s decisions.
4