interpretation, application and compliance with the EAC Treaty; (ii) set aside the First Instance Division’s holding that this Court has no jurisdiction to ensure adherence to the provisions of the African Charter and its Protocol; (iii) set aside the First Instance Division’s finding that Appellant’s Reference did not disclose a cause of action against the First Respondent be set aside; (iv) set aside the First Instance Division’s order dismissing the Appellant’s case against the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 5th Respondents regarding the delay to deposit their relevant declarations under the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights; (v) set aside the First Instance Division’s holding that the 1st Respondent’s failure to carry out his supervisory role over all the Partner States of the East African Community was not a contravention of the Treaty; (vi) set aside the First Instance Division’s, holding that neither the Secretary General (1st Respondent), nor the EACJ can compel the Republics of Uganda, Kenya and Burundi (the 2nd, 3rd and 5th Respondents, respectively) to deposit their respective declarations; and (vii) allow the Appeal. 80. In view of our findings on the specific issues that were before this Court, we grant the Order sought by the Appellant in the above sub-paragraph (ii) of paragraph 79. The prayer in sub-paragraph (i) 27