“The proceedings provided for in this Article shall be instituted within two months of the enactment, publication, directive, decision or action complained of, or in the absence thereof, of the day in which it came to the knowledge of the complainant, as the case may be.” 50.It has been further argued by Mr. Kaahwa that the starting date of an act complained of under the provision of Article 30 (2) of the Treaty is not the day the act ends, but the day when it is first effected and contends that both justice and equity abhor a claimant’s indolence or sloth which is the case in the present Reference. 51.In support of his stance, he referred us to the decisions of this Court in Omar Awadh and IMLU ( supra) and submitted that on the basis of those decisions , the Applicant in the present Reference cannot argue that computation of time can only commence after the cessation of his detention as any argument premised on continued breach militates against the very spirit and grain of the principle of legal certainty. 52.It is therefore his case that since the Reference was filed outside the time limit prescribed by Article 30(2) aforesaid, the same should be struck off with costs. 21