1.1 Introduction

This research is a comparative analysis on East African Laws with European Union Laws. The comparative analysis shall revolve around the following areas providing case laws as well: movement and exchange of goods, movements of people, labor or workers, services, capital transfer and capital, and Rights to establish businesses, professions and resident. East Africa Community is an integration of various countries consisting of United Republic of Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Burundi, Rwanda, Democratic Republic of Congo, and South Sudan.[1]East Africa was established in 2000, in which the confederation was aiming at broadening and extending interaction and cooperation within its partner states in, among others, political, economic and social fields.[2] The EAC has been expanding gradually from three that included: the United Republic of Tanzania, Republic of Kenya and the Republic of Uganda. Progressively, the following nations have joined in the process include: Rwanda, Burundi, South Sudan and Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

In addition to the above, the organization has established its Custom Union in 2005, and Common Market in 2010 and at the same time still working on Monetary Union.  The aim of East Africa is premised in establishing a political federation in which emphasis of strong participation of private entities and civil societies.[3] However, despite the progress made by East Africa Community there are still necessitation for legal and policy framework that are anticipated to enhance institutional functionality of the EAC block.[4]

On the extreme end, European Union is founded on the rule of the law. This has the implication that EU is premised on the foundation of treaties that have been brought forth and thereby approved democratically by the members. The EU laws therefore aims at achieving of the EU treaties and EU policies into practice.[5] The laws of EU are embedded into primary and secondary laws. Primary laws are based on actions taken by the EU Members. The binding agreements between the member countries as are stipulated in EU objectives, rules for EU institutions, how decisions are made and interaction between EU and its members. The treaties are the starting basic point for EU Law. Whereas the body laws are premised on the objectives and principles that forms the secondary law.[6]

Furthermore, EU laws are systems of rules functioning within the member states of the EU. Subsequently, the establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community after World War II, in the meantime, the EU has existed to promote peace, its values and the well-being of people. The political institutions, social and economic policies which surpasses nation states based on the intentions of cooperation and human development. More so, the Court of Justice of EU has emerged as new legal order in the international law[7].

The operation of EAC is directed by its Treat that established the community that was signed on November 30, 1999 and came into force in July 7, 2002, Article 5 of the Treaty clearly stipulates the new body was established to be better than the former that has focused on the matters of the economy. However, the current objectives of the EAC are premised in improving the standards of living and life quality of people, ensuring reasonable and proper use of resources endowed to the community member states, taking into accountability into safety, and sustainability of environment and to ensure balanced, orderly, consistent and fair development in East Africa, promoting participation and benefit of the people, enabling the business community and the general public playing a leading role,  strengthening and improving the role of women and marginalized in development, promoting peace, security and stability in East Africa, and promoting other activities aimed at a successful community.[8]

1.2 Movement or Exchange of Goods in EAC and EU Blocks

The EAC and EU are having partnership based on Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) finalized and negotiated on October 16, 2014 involving five member states of EAC (Rwanda, Burundi, Tanzania, Kenya and Uganda).[9] In addition to the above, it is the EU who negotiates on the behalf of the member countries and thus has a voice that shakes the world economy and also a big trade block in the world as par say.[10] Whereas, on the extreme end, the EAC emphasizes on regional integration as a cornerstone in its trade partners among the member states policy that inculcate strengthening public institutions and private sector organizations that are dealing with exports.[11] In other words, the EAC is striving to uplift the standards of the member state through legal and policy frameworks that are likely to create an environment that enhance trade and thereby negotiates on behalf of the member states in the expansion of markets that are likely to impact the member states.

The following measures have been undertaken by EAC in order to enhance trade within and without member states:

1. The Custom Union Protocol signed 2004 in March and became effective on January 1, 2005 aiming at furthering liberalization of intra-regional trade in goods, promoting production efficiency in the community.
2. The Common Market Protocol: signed in November 2009 and came effective on July 1, 2010. Seeks to progressively transform the member states of the community in a single market that permits the free movements of goods, persons, services, labor and capital as well as guaranteeing to residence and establishment.
3. Trade and Investments Frameworks Agreements: was signed between the member states and the United States and China in 2011 aimed at promoting commodity trade, exchange visits by business people and cooperation in investment among others.
4. Trade Facilitation: the partner states have agreed to collaborate in simplification of regulations, standardization, and through harmonization of trade information and certification to facilitate trade in goods.
5. Anti-Dumping measure: the community has developed anti-dumping regulation.
6. Competition Policy and Law: the community has put in place laws and regulation guiding competition policy and law and the member states are ratifying the same.
7. Re-Export of Goods: re-exportation of goods are exempted from tariffs of import or exports.
8. Removal of Non-Tariff Barriers to Trade: the member states have agreed to remove all non-tariff barriers to trade and not to impose new ones based on Article 13 of the Custom Union Protocol.
9. Standard Measures: the EAC are in cognizant of standardization and quality assurance, metrology and testing for the preferment of trade and investment, and consumer safety amongst supplementary things.[12]

On the other expedition, the EU negotiates trade agreement on behalf of the member states and by so doing the same expanding free trade area. The agreements covers preferential duty rates in shipments. The following are the measures that EU have taken on behalf of the member states include:

1. EU- Vietnam Free Trade Agreement: negotiated and signed on behalf of member states in 2019. The agreement covers range of goods and services between the EU and Vietnam.
2. EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA): the EU and Japan signed the Economic Partnership Agreement including goods, services and investments, removing tariffs, non-tariff barriers and other connected trade matters that involve public procurement, regulatory issues, completion and sustainable development. The EPA commenced and applied as early as February 1, 2019.
3. EU-Canada – Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA): the agreement signed in October 30, 2016 and came into force in September 21, 2017, with the implication of making imports and exports between the Canadians and members states are cheaper through the removal of tariffs and non-tariff barriers.
4. EU-Singapore Free Trade Agreement: signed in October 2018 as EU-Singapore Free Trade Agreement. The agreement came into force in November 21, 2019.
5. Modernization of the EU-Mexico Global Agreement: have been agreed on the notion that some technical matters would be dealt with by 2019. The benefits revolve around tariffs in force. It became one of the first new generation agreement that came into being.[13]

1.2.1 Case Laws

There no clear case law on free movement of goods and services within the member states of EAC. However, the member states “….have agreed to establish free trade (or zero duty imposed) on goods and services amongst themselves and agreed on a common external tariff (CET), whereby imports from the countries outside EAC zones are subjected to the same tariff when sold to any EAC partner state.”[14] In essence, the EAC or the citizens among the party member states have never lodged a litigation against any of the member states based on the assumption of the researcher. However, in future, there are likelihood of implorations of litigation cases filed by either EAC or a citizen in any of the member states against any member state citing any of the problems brought about by the integration of the EAC free trade on goods and services.

Articles 26 and 28-37 of the Treaty and functioning of the European Union (TFEU) are premised in achieving the free movement of goods and services with the member states and the third party states which are considered as participants in the treaty. Formerly Article 28 of TFEU only promoted the movement of good within the member states. However, due to extension of treaty on Customs beyond the members including the third party states, there is inclusion of third member states in the free trade policies that lowers tariffs and removal non-tariff barriers. In addition, as a result since, the articles did not have provisions on definitions and concepts related to free-movement of goods and services, the Court of Justice the European Union asserted that any charge, whatever application or nevertheless is imposed upon a product imported from a member state to the exclusion of a domestic product has through altering its price in regards to same products as a custom duty may be considered as a charge having equivalent effect, not considering of its nature or type (joined cases 2/62 and 3/62 and Case 232/78.[15]

Joined Case 2/62 and Case 232/62 progressed in seeking for derogation of those that are provided in Article 226 of the European Economic Commission (EEC) with dependence of the view taken by the EEC which are distinctly in nature and effect based on the warning available to EEC premised on Article 169 with the implication of not frustrating the latter procedures before the customer came into being.  In reference to p. 431, the case summarized that the block based on Article 9, the community member states are bound by the provision that created a custom union that prohibits to introduce new tariffs and those already in existence. Therefore, the Court ruled that in the case brought by EEC against Grand Duchy of Luxembourg and the Kingdom of Belgium were permissible and well founded. Secondly, the Court decreed the increase in the special duties as determined by Luxembourg and Belgium in reference to the issue of import licenses to gingerbread, and extension lead of that duty products that are similar to Gingerbread that comes under heading N. 19.08 of the Common Tariff brought after January1, 1958, are contrary to treaty. Lastly, defendants were ordered to pay the costs of the litigation.[16]

1.3 Movements of People, Labor or Workers, Services, Capital Transfer, and Rights to establish Businesses, Professions and Resident in EAC and EU Blocks

1.3.1 Movements of People, Labor or Workers, Services, Capital Transfer, and Rights to establish Businesses, Professions and Resident in EAC

Free movement of people are provided for in Article 7 of Common Market Protocol (CMP) for citizens of other partner states within their territories. The partner member states are required in ensuring non-discrimination of the citizens of the other partner states based on their nationalities by ensuring:

1. the entry of citizens of the other Partner States into the territory of the Partner State without a visa;
2. free movement of persons who are citizens of the other Partner States within the territory of the Partner State;
3. that the citizens of the other Partner States are allowed to stay in the territory of the Partner State; and
4. That the citizens of the other Partner States are allowed to exit the territory of the Partner State without restrictions.[17]

Labor or Working among the States in East Africa Community: premised on Common Market protocol, citizens within EAC are allowed to get employment in any state within the community and thus no discrimination based on nationality. In addition to the above, EAC citizens have rights to establish their business in any partner country as well as pursuing  economic activities in accordance with the national laws of the partner state. More so, self-employed persons are able to follow after their own work across the region and can access social security scheme of the host country. It has been the desire of the Common Market Protocol that the member states in EAC to remove all kinds of restriction on the right of establishment based on nationality or companies, firms and self-employed persons.[18]

Capital Transfer, and Rights to establish Businesses in East African Community States: premised on the objectives of Article 5 of EAC;

1. The Community is expected to develop policy and programs that are geared and deepening cooperation among the Partner States in political, economic, social and cultural fields, research and technology, defense, security, legal, and judicial affairs towards mutual benefits.
2. The Partner States shall undertake to establish among themselves and in accordance with the provision of EAC Treaty, a Custom Union, Common Market, subsequently a Monetary Union and probably a Political Federation geared towards strengthening and regulating the industrial, commercial, infrastructural, cultural, social, political, and other relations of the Partner States to enhance accelerated harmonious and balanced development and sustained and expansion of economic activities and benefit thereof shall be shared equitably among the member states.
3. The community is anticipated to enhance:

• Sustainable growth and development of Partner States.
• The strengthening and consolidation of co-operation in agreed fields that would lead to equitable economic development within the Partner States.
• The promotion of sustainable utilization of the natural resources of the Partner States and the taking of measures that would effectively protect the natural environment of the Partner States.
• The strengthening and consolidation of the long standing political, economic, social, cultural and traditional ties and associations between the peoples of the Partner States so as to promote a people-centered mutual development of these ties and associations.
• The mainstreaming of gender in all its endeavors and the enhancement of the role of women in cultural, social, political, economic and technological development.
• The promotion of peace, security, and stability within, and good neighborliness among, the Partner States.
• The enhancement and strengthening of partnerships with the private sector and civil society in order to achieve sustainable socio-economic and political development.
• The undertaking of such other activities calculated to further the objectives of the Community, as the Partner States may from time to time decide to undertake in common.[19]

Professions and Resident in EAC Partner States: the EAC have undertaken the following measures in ensuring free movement of persons and labor:

1. Harmonized classification of issuance of work and residence permit fee procedures. The 20th meeting of the Sectoral Council for Ministers responsible for EAC and Planning, held on 13th July 2014, the EAC Secretariat is coordinating the process of harmonization of the work / residence permit fees in accordance with Regulation 6(9) of EAC Common Market (Free Movement of Workers) Annex II.
2. Increased migration of labor. The number of migrants crossing borders in search of employment is expected to increase rapidly due to the failure of globalization to provide jobs and economic opportunities.
3. Diaspora Citizens. EAC Citizens residing in other countries are encouraged to register with their embassy.
4. E-immigration. Enables users to request for certain services electronically without having to personally appear before the local immigration authorities, for example applications for entry visas, resident permits, passports and even, exit permission(East Africa Community 2022).[20]

1.3.2 Movements of People, Labor or Workers, Services, Capital Transfer, and Rights to establish Businesses, Professions and Resident in EU

Movements of People, Labor or Workers, Services in EU Partner States: the citizens with EU enjoy free movement that include: the rights of movement and residence for workers, the entry and residency rights for family members, right to work in another Member State and given same or treatment that the citizens at the Host Country are receiving. However, restriction apply to public service. The above has the legal basis premised on Articles 3(2), 4 (2) (a), 20, 26 and 45-48 on the Function of European Union (TFEU).[21]

Capital Transfer, and Rights to establish Businesses in EU Partner States: the free capital movement reinforces single markets by:

1. Contributing to economic growth by enabling capital to be invested efficiently and promotes the use of the euro as an international currency,
2. Contributing to the EU’s role as a global player.
3. It was also indispensable for the development of Economic and Monetary Union and the introduction of the euro. The legal basis is embedded under articles 63, 64, 65, and 66 of the Treaty of the Function of European Union (TFEU).[22]

In addition to the above, European law that protects the contracts of employment of people employed in business that are transferred through the Transfers of Undertaking Directive that came into being in 2001. It is stipulated in the Directive that any employee’s contract of employment will be automatically transferred on the same terms as before in the event of the transfer of the undertaking.[23]

Professions and Resident in EU Partner States: EU residence do not need work permit or permit to reside in any of the European Union. “The Free Movement of European Union Nationals and their Family Members Order 2007 which transposes the provisions Union Council Directive 2004/38 of the European Parliament, and the Council of the 29^th April 2004 makes provision for the implementation and administration of EU and EEA Nationals rights, exercising their free movement.” In other words, professionals can reside in any country so long as he has been registered in the country within the EU Member States or partnering states.[24] The free movement of professionals has all probabilities of expanding the economies of nations since the immigrants brings new culture and skills that transform the work environment.

1.3.3 Case Laws in EAC and in EU in Reference Movements of People, Labor or Workers, Services, Capital Transfer, and Rights to establish Businesses, Professions and Resident in EAC and EU Blocks

1.3.3.1 Case Laws in EAC in Reference Movements of People, Labor or Workers, Services, Capital Transfer, and Rights to establish Businesses, Professions and Resident in EAC Block

THE EAST AFRICAN CENTRE FOR TRADE POLICY AND LAW v. THE SECRETARY GENERAL OF THE EAST AFRICAN COMMUNITY

The case dealt with the amendment to East Africa Community Treaty and the dispute settlement mechanism provided for in both protocols, limit/deny jurisdiction to the East Africa Court of Justice (EACJ) transferring matters reserved for EACJ under the Treaty to Partner State institutions and Organs.

Case Presented by the Applicant: it was stated by the applicant that it had come to his or her notice the amendment of Chapter 8 of the Treaty specifically through the introduction of stipulation in Article 27(1) and creation of Article 30 (3) and had also concluded the East African Community Customs Union Protocol and the East African Community Common Market Protocol. Secondly, the petitioner alleged that that the amendments to the Treaty and the dispute settlement mechanisms provided for in the two Protocols, deny original jurisdiction to the EACJ, from handling disputes arising from the Protocols contrary to the expectations of the Treaty. Thirdly, The Applicant further asserts that the above actions, in as far as they limit/oust the jurisdiction of the EACJ, are contrary to the provisions of the Treaty and in particular that:

1. The stipulation in Article 27 (1) and Article 30 (3) as much as it granted the jurisdiction to partner states, it took away the supremacy of EACJ in regard to interpretation of the Treaty, gravely contradict and infringe Articles 5,6,8(1),(4) & (5), 23,33(2) and 126 of the Treaty.
2. The negotiation and conclusion of the East African Customs Union Protocol, specifically Annex IX and Article 54(2) of the Common Market Protocol, in as far as they do not grant original jurisdiction of handling disputes to the EACJ, infringe Articles 5, 6, 8(1), (4) &(5), 23, 27(1), 30(1), (3) 33(2) and 126 of the Treaty.

• In affidavit Sworn on behalf of Applicant by its own researcher dated the 24th November 2011, the main thrust of the Applicant’s case is that the impugned amendments to the Treaty and the dispute settlement mechanisms provided for in both Protocols, limit / deny jurisdiction to the EACJ by transferring matters reserved for the EACJ under the Treaty to Partner State institutions and organs.
• The applicant contended that: the act of granting national Courts concurrent jurisdiction with the EACJ to interpret the Treaty, is likely to lead to conflicting interpretation of the Treaty by national courts; and thereby diluting the special jurisdiction donated by the Treaty to the EACJ.

Furthermore, the applicant sought:

1. That the proviso to Article 27 and Article 30(3) of the EAC Treaty contravene Articles 5,6,8(1),(4) & (5), 23,33(2) and 126 of the Treaty.
2. That the dispute settlement mechanism provided for in the Customs Union Protocol and the Common Market Protocol contravene Articles 5, 6, 8(1), (4) &(5), 23, 27(1), 30(1)&(3), 33(2) and 126 of the Treaty.

• That the Respondent makes appropriate amendments to the Treaty and Protocols to cure the defects identified in this Reference.

1. That the costs of and incidental to the Reference be met by the Respondent.
2. That the Honorable Court be pleased to make such further or other orders as may be necessary in the circumstances.

The Respondent Case

1. The Respondent admits the amendments to the Treaty and their contents. The Respondent also admits the conclusion of the two Protocols by the Partner States of the Community as well as the establishment of the dispute resolution mechanisms complained of by the Applicant.
2. That the jurisdiction of the Court is limited to the interpretation and application of the Treaty, provided that such jurisdiction does not extend to the application of any interpretation to jurisdiction conferred by the Treaty on organs of a Partner State. Therefore, the amendments do not infringe on the jurisdiction of the EACJ as currently provided in the Treaty or at all.
3. that the mechanism for dispute settlement provided for under Article 24 of the Customs Union Protocol is in harmony with the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreements to which the Partner States are signatory

Points of Agreement

1. That the Treaty was amended to create inter alia a proviso to Article 27(1) and Article 30(3).
2. That Article 24(1) of the Customs Union Protocol establishes an East African Community Committee on Trade Remedies and vests it with dispute settlement rules in accordance with the East African Customs Union (Dispute Settlement Mechanism) Regulations.

• That Article 54(2) of the Common Market Protocol provides that Partner States shall guarantee in accordance with their Constitutions, national laws and administrative procedures that, “a competent judicial, administrative or legislative authority shall rule on the rights of the person who is seeking redress” for infringement on rights under the Protocol.

1. That the stated status of the parties is valid.
2. That the Court has jurisdiction to determine the Reference.

Issue: issues that were agreed by the Court to determined were:

• Whether the amendment of the Treaty to introduce a proviso to Article 27(1) and Article 30(3) is inconsistent with or in contravention of Articles 5, 6, 8(1),(4) & (5), 23,33(2) and 126 of the Treaty.
• Whether the Customs Union Protocol and the Common Market Protocol in as far as they do not grant the East African Court of Justice jurisdiction of handling disputes arising from the implementation of these Protocols infringe Articles 5, 6, 8(1), (4) &(5), 23, 27(1), 30(1),(3) 33(2) and 126 of the Treaty.
• Whether the Applicant is entitled to the declarations sought

Determination of the Case:

It was determined by the EACJ the EAC Treaty is International Treaty and is subject to international law on the interpretation of treaties specifically, the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. The relevant Article to this Reference is Article 31, which sets out the general rule of interpretation of treaties. Article 31 (1) provides that:

• A treaty shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to the terms of the Treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose.
• By examining the relevant provisions of the Treaty prior to the introduction of the proviso to Article 27(1) and the addition of Article 30 (3); as well as the creation of the dispute settlement mechanisms under the Customs Union Protocol and the Common Market Protocol.
• Then examination the said provisions of the Treaty as they are now, after the amendments and the conclusion of the two Protocols.
• Under the issue, the Applicant’s contention is that the proviso to Article 27(1) and Article 30(3) in so far as they grant concurrent jurisdiction to the organs of the Partner States take away the supremacy of the EACJ with regard to the interpretation of the EAC Treaty.
• Decisions of the Court on the interpretation and application of this Treaty shall have precedence over the decisions of the national courts on a similar issue.
• By the provisions under Articles 23, 33(2) and 34, the Treaty established the principle of overall supremacy of the Court over the interpretation and application of the Treaty, to ensure harmony and certainty.
• It should be appreciated that the question of what “the Treaty reserves for a Partner States” is a provision of the Treaty and a matter that ought to be determined harmoniously and with certainty. If left as amended, the provisions are likely to lead to conflicting interpretations of the Treaty by national courts of the Partner States.
• The Court has the role and jurisdiction to interpret and apply the provisions of the two Protocols as well, pursuant to the Court’s jurisdiction under Articles 23 read together with Article 27 (1) of the Treaty. Consequently, the answer to question (a) above is that the provisions of the protocols did not oust the jurisdiction of the EACJ from handling disputes arising from the implementation of the said Protocols.
• any person whose rights and liberties as recognized by this Protocol have been infringed upon, shall have the right to redress, even where this infringement has been committed by persons acting in their official capacities; and
• The competent judicial, administrative or legislative authority or any other competent authority, shall rule on the rights of the person who is seeking redress.[25]

1.3.3.2 Case Laws in EU in Reference Movements of People, Labor or Workers, Services, Capital Transfer, and Rights to establish Businesses, Professions and Resident in EU Block

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY V GRAND DUCHY OF LUXEMBOURG AND KINGDOM OF BELGIUM – JOINED CASES 2/62 AND 3/62.

Summary of the Case:

1. Procedures for seeking a derogation such as those provided for by article 226 of the EEC Treaty, the outcome of which depends upon the view taken by the commission, are entirely distinct in both their nature and effects from the warning procedure available to the commission under Article 169 and cannot therefore in anyway frustrate the latter procedure.
2. A request for derogation from the general rules of the Treaty cannot have the effect of legalizing unilateral measures which conflict with those rules and cannot therefore legalize retroactively the initial infringement.
3. It follows from the clarity, certainty and unrestricted scope of Articles 9 and 12, from the general scheme of their provisions and of the treaty as a whole, that the prohibition of new customs duties, linked with the principles of the free movement of products, constitutes an essential rule and that in consequence any exception, which moreover is to be narrowly interpreted, must be clearly stipulated.
4. A charge having equivalent effect within the meaning of Articles 9 and 12 of the EEC Treaty, whatever it is called and whatever its mode of application, may be regarded as a duty imposed unilaterally either at the time of importation or subsequently, and which, if imposed specifically upon a product imported from a member state to the exclusion of a similar domestic product, has, by altering its price, the same effect on the free movement of products as a customs duty.

This concept, far from being an exception to the general rule prohibiting customs duties, is on the contrary necessarily complementary to it and enables it to be made effective. The concept of a charge having equivalent effect, invariably linked to that of ‘customs duties’, is evidence of a general intention to prohibit not only measures which obviously take the form of the classic customs duty but also all those which, presented under other names or introduced by the indirect means of other procedures, would lead to the same discriminatory or protective results as customs duties.

5. Although the first paragraph of Article 95 by implication allows ‘taxation’ on an imported product, it is only to the limited extent to which the same taxation is imposed equally upon similar domestic products. The field of application of this article cannot be extended to the point of allowing compensation between a tax burden created for the purpose of imposition upon an imported product and a tax burden of a different nature, for example economic, imposed on a similar domestic product .
6. To resolve the difficulties which might arise in a given economic sector, the Member States wished community procedures to be established in order to prevent unilateral intervention by national administrations.[26]

 

Subject of the Case:

Application for a ruling on the legality of:

1. Increases in the special duty levied by Belgium and Luxembourg on the issue of import licenses for gingerbread; and
2. The extension of that duty to products similar gingerbread under heading no. 19.08 of the common customs tariff;

Which is contested on the ground that they were introduced after 1 January 1958.[27]

Determination of the Case:

The Court determined that:

1. Rules that applications 2 and 3/62 brought by the Commission of the European Economic Community against the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg and the kingdom of Belgium are admissible and well founded;
2. Declares that the increases in the special duty determined by Luxembourg and Belgium on the issue of import licenses for gingerbread, and the extension of that duty to products similar to gingerbread coming under heading no. 19.08 of the common customs tariff, introduced after 1 January 1958, are contrary to the Treaty;
3. Orders the defendants to pay the costs.[28]

1.4 Conclusion

The paper was exploring comparisons in East African Community and European Union. Through the exploration, it was discovered by the researcher that both EAC and EU are in pursuit of the well-being of their citizens. They have put all policies and legal frameworks in place in order to ensure that with their jurisdictions and beyond, there is free movement of people, goods, and services. However, in EU is more advanced in the sense that the Court of Justice have enhance and to certain extreme has overruled the member states who violate customs and tariffs. More so, the EACJ have promoted activism in terms of interpretation of the legal framework and entrenching the rule of the law among the member states through rulings that enhances free trade and movement people within the member states.  However, EU is more advanced in the sense it negotiates on behalf of its member states on the expansion of free trade areas. On the other area, EAC is promoting free trade areas within its member states as well as negotiating with the third parties on the promotion of exports to such destinations. The globalization and cooperation between willing partners are likely to improve the well-being partners through legal and policy frameworks that guides trade negotiations and free trade markets globally and regionally