VIII. DETERMINATION OF THE ISSUES BY THE COURT Issue No. 1: Whether the Reference discloses a cause of action taking into account the provisions of Article 30(1) of the Treaty Submissions 28. While the Applicant argued that the Reference discloses a cause of action against the Respondents, the latter maintained that no cause of action did arise against them. Applicant’s Submissions 29. The Applicant’s Counsel submitted that the Reference discloses a cause of action on different grounds: Firstly, that Article 30(1) of the Treaty authorizes legal and natural persons, resident in a Partner State, to make a reference to this Court for determination whether a decision or action of a Partner State or the Community is an infringement of the Treaty. He argued that what that person needs to do is to plead facts that show there has been an action, decision, or omission by a Partner State or the Community and that the action, decision, or omission contravenes a provision of the Treaty. 30. In that regard, learned Counsel contended that the Applicant has pleaded in the Reference that the 1st Respondent, the Government of Burundi, a Partner State, unlawfully prosecuted Mr. Rufyikiri before an Anti-Corruption Court without regard to due process which is a component of the Rule of law; disbarred the same Mr. Rufyikiri from the Roll of Advocates without regard to the law or due process and without valid or lawful reason and without regard to due process, prohibited the same Mr. Rufyikiri from travelling outside of Burundi. REFERENCE NO.1 OF 2014 Page 11