Issue No.3: Whether the First Instance Division erred in law when it held that the 1st Respondent had no duty under the EAC Treaty to supervise the 2nd, 3rd and 5th Respondents to comply with their obligations under the Charter, the Protocol, and the Vienna Convention. 76. The Secretary General’s supervisory role is articulated in Article 29(1) of the Treaty. It provides that:“1. Where the Secretary General considers that a Partner State has failed to fulfil an obligation under this Treaty or has infringed a provision of this Treaty, the Secretary General shall submit his or her findings to the Partner State concerned for that Partner State to submit its observations on the findings;” In the Katabazi case (supra), it was observed that:“....the above provision requires the Secretary General to “submit his or her findings to the Partner State concerned and that [and] ...there is nothing to prohibit the Secretary General from conducting an investigation on his/her own initiative...”. 77. We do subscribe to the above reasoning that the Secretary General can act, on his own initiative when there are allegations of violation of the Treaty, or when he or she considers that a Partner State has failed to fulfil an obligation under the Treaty. In this case, the Secretary General indicated that, once he got information of the Appellant’s complaint, he wrote to all Respondents seeking a clarification on the matter. Once the Reference was filed, he left the matter in the Court’s hands. The First Instance Division found that in the circumstances of this Reference, the Secretary General could 25