internationally but the 2nd Respondent failed to fulfill his obligations under Articles 29 and 71(1)(d) of the Treaty and failed to intervene in the matter. 11.For the reasons above, the Applicant prays for the following declarations and orders from this Court: (a) That keeping him in detention is an infringement of Article 6(d) and 71 (1) (d) of the Treaty and that the said action is null and void. (b) That the Secretary General failed to fulfill his obligations under Article 29 and 71 (1)(d) of the Treaty; and (c) He has a full right to enjoy his freedom; and (d) An order should be issued that he, be immediately released unconditionally. (e) Costs of the Reference . 1st Respondent’s case 12.In his Response to the Amended Reference, filed on 22nd February 2013 and in his written submissions filed on 6th November 2013, the 1st Respondent admits that the Applicant was arrested and detained as alleged but avers that the said acts were done in accordance with the laws of the Republic of Burundi, specifically Article 265 of the 1981 Burundi Penal Code ( repealed in April 2013). 5 He further avers that although the