32.In view of the aforegoing, Counsel for the 1st Respondent urges this Court to declare itself incompetent to hear and determine the instant Reference. 2nd Respondent’s submission 33.Mr. Wilbert Kaahwa, Counsel to the Community, advocating the case for the 2nd Respondent had the following to say in answer to the issue of want of jurisdiction: (a) That this Court derives its mandate from Articles 23 (1), 27 (1) and 30 (1) of the Treaty. In Article 23 (1) the Treaty provides that: “The Court shall be a judicial body which shall ensure the adherence of law in the interpretation and application of and compliance with the Treaty.” The Treaty then provides in Article 27 (1) that : “The Court shall initially have jurisdiction over the interpretation and application of this Treaty.” 34.It is Counsel’s argument that the Treaty makes provision, for reference by natural or legal persons on any matter that infringes the Treaty or 14