Communication 431/12 – Thomas Kwoyelo v. Uganda of human rights, an obligation that was not present when the two Brigadiers were granted amnesty. 189. From the submissions of both parties, it is clear that the Victim renounced rebellion and applied for amnesty in January 2010, and pursuant to the Amnesty Act that suffices to grant amnesty to the Victim. Accordingly, on 19 March 2010 the Amnesty Commission forwarded the application to the DPP for his consideration, noting that the Victim qualified for amnesty under the provisions of the Amnesty Act. It is also on record that the DPP did not respond to the said application by the Amnesty Commission up until November 2011. The DPP rather proceeded to prefer criminal charges against the Victim on 6 September 2010 before the Chief Magistrate’s Court at Buganda Road for various offenses under the 1964 Geneva Conventions Act. 190. The ICC Act was enacted on 25 June 2010, that is, six (6) months after the Victim applied for amnesty, and three (3) months after the Amnesty Commission forwarded the Victim’s application stating its view that the Victim is eligible for amnesty under the Amnesty Act of 2000. Therefore, there is no way in which the State could base its argument on provisions of an Act that was not in existence at the time when the alleged differential treatment occurred. That would be a retroactive application of the law, which is a flagrant breach of the principle of legality. 191. Furthermore, the enactment of the Act cannot actually justify the differential treatment, because under international law, Uganda committed itself to investigate and try those responsible for serious violations of human rights from the moment it ratified the Rome Statute, which was in 2002. Its duty to investigate and try those responsible should not be assumed to have started from the time it enacted a law domesticating the Rome Statute no matter what its domestic law may stipulate regarding domestication and enforcement of international treaties. It is a wellestablished principle of international law that a state cannot invoke its domestic 51 62nd Ordinary Session, 25 April – 9 July 2018