observance of, and/or compliance with the Treaty provisions – including the provisions of any other international instruments which are incorporated in the Treaty, whether explicitly [as in Article 6(d)], or implicitly [as in Article 7 (2)]. 70. The above reasoning has been reiterated in several decisions of this Court. In The Attorney General of the Republic of Rwanda V Plaxeda Rugumba, EACJ Appeal No.1 of 2012 the Court reaffirmed its jurisdiction to interpret and to apply the provisions of the Treaty, including its Article 6 (d), 7(2) and 8 (1) (c). It held that failure by the authorities in Rwanda to charge Lt. Col. Seveline Rugigana Ngabo with specific offences for 5 months, was fundamentally inconsistent with Rwanda’s express undertakings under Articles 6(d), 7(2) and 8(1)(c) of the Treaty to observe the principles of good governance, including in particular, the principle of adherence to the rule of law, and the promotion and protection of human rights. These failures, singly and collectively, constituted an infringement of the said provisions of the Treaty, (see also, the case of James Katabazi (supra). 71. Briefly, then, nothing can preclude the East African Court of Justice from referring to the relevant provisions of the Charter, its Protocol and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties in order to interpret the Treaty. In as far as the Articles quoted above especially Article 6(d) recognize the Charter’s relevance in promotion and protection of human and peoples’ rights, then compliance with those provisions of the Charter become, ipso jure, an obligation imposed upon the Partner States under the Treaty. 23