THE RESPONDENT’S SUBMISSIONS 91. Counsel for the Respondent on his part argued that the Applicant’s case as well as his submissions are premised on the alleged inaction or failure by the Government to recover a huge loss of money. Therefore, Counsel for the Respondent submitted that the Applicant should demonstrate such a loss with enough evidence otherwise the Government cannot be blamed for any hypothetical inaction or failure. 92. In conclusion, Counsel for the Respondent invited the Court to find that there was no loss of USD17,826,038.94 by Government of Uganda to QCIL. DETERMINATION ON ISSUE NO.4 93. We have considered the submissions from all the Parties and at this stage, we have to opine as follows:This issue is not a standalone question rather it has to be read and understood in the context of Issue No.3. That is to say that, once we have determined Issue No.3 in the negative, Issue No.4 is no longer alive to the extent that those two Issues are intertwined. 94. In any event, we have no jurisdiction to determine such a matter. ISSUE NO.5: Whether there was Inaction, Refusal/or Failure by the Government of Uganda to recover USD17,826,038.94 from Quality Chemical Industries Limited: 95. This Issue is a corollary of the two foregoing issues in so far as it cannot be read and interpreted in isolation. Once we have determined that there has been no violation of Articles 6(d), 7(2) and 8(1) (c), then Issue No.5 is untenable. Reference No. 5 of 2013 Page 33