 The finding of the Court that would affect QCIL is the issue of the loss of USD17,826,038.94 which in the Applicant’s Submissions is not justiciable before this Court;  The mandate of the Court is to interpret the contents of the letter dated 8th July, 2013 and inaction of the Attorney General of Uganda to implement the IGG’s recommendations;  The recovery of the aforesaid sum of money is not sought from the Court, but rather to determine whether the purported recovery and/or inaction and failure to recover by the Government is inconsistent with Articles 6(d), 7(2) and 8(1) (c) of the Treaty;  The Respondent in his submissions has not shown clearly how QCIL would be affected by the Court’s findings and the submissions are purely speculative;  In conclusion, the Applicant invited the Court to interpret and make declaration that, the acts and inaction of the Respondent in the context of the violation of the Treaty and dismiss the objection framed in Issue No.2. THE RESPONDENT’S SUBMISSIONS 39. The Respondent submitted on Issue No.2 that it would be unfair and a violation of the principles of natural justice to find against a third party; not party to the Reference. He further argued that a fair and impartial trial would involve a hearing by an impartial and disinterested tribunal, the right to be present or be represented by an advocate, to present its defence supported by evidence. In support of his submissions, he cited Modern Holdings (EA) Limited Vs. Kenya Reference No. 5 of 2013 Page 16