11. In a nutshell, his response is as follows:a) That the Court has no jurisdiction in the matter of this Reference; b) That no violation of the Treaty occurred by the arrest and detention of the Applicant since this was done in accordance with the law of the Republic of Burundi; c) He therefore prays that the Court should dismiss the Reference with costs. SECOND RESPONDENT’S CASE 12. The 2nd Respondent filed his Response on 5th April 2012. 13. Affidavits in support of the response sworn by Dr. Julius Tangus Rotich and Mr. Jean Claude Nsengiyumva were filed on 13th March 2013 and 5th April 2013 respectively. The 2nd Respondent also relies on his written submissions filed on 22nd May 2013. His case is as follows:a) The 2nd Respondent has denied all responsibility in the matter before the Court as he was at all material times not aware of the alleged arrest and detention of the Applicant to prompt him to undertake any such investigations as he would in the discharge of his duties deem apt. b) That as soon as he learnt of the Applicant’s case, he took action with the Government of the Republic of Burundi; c) In the premises, he pleads that the granting of the Declaratory Order and other Reliefs sought by the Applicant against him does not arise. REFERENCE NO.3 OF 2012 Page 5

Select target paragraph3