24. It was his case that the Press Law is in uniformity with the Treaty and specifically Articles 6(d) and 7(2). Further, the acknowledged fact that it has been criticised by some organisations and individuals does not imply that the said Law violates the Treaty. In addition, that the Parliament of Burundi passed the Press Law as the representative of the people and its decisions cannot be replaced by the wishes of any other organization or person. 25. In any event, that the Press Law has been challenged in the Constitutional Court of Burundi and since its decision is yet to be delivered, the Reference is premature and misconceived as the latter Court is the only one with jurisdiction to interpret the legality of the Press Law. 26. For the above reasons, the Respondent prays that the Reference be dismissed with costs. E. SCHEDULING CONFERENCE 27. At the Scheduling Conference held on 18th September, 2014 pursuant to Rule 53 of the Rules, it was agreed that the Press Law came into effect on 4th June 2012 but that the Constitutional Court of Burundi, after the Reference and a response to it had both been filed, had declared parts of it to be unconstitutional. 28. The issues that were therefore, drawn for determination were the following:a) Whether the Reference is properly before this Court; b) Whether the provisions of the Burundi Press Law are inconsistent with and in violation of Articles 6(d) and 7(2) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community; and c) Whether the Applicant is entitled to the Reliefs sought. Reference No. 5 of 2013 Page 8