The highly awaited case involving exiled Rwandan tycoon Tribert Ayabatwa Rujugiro and the Rwandan government in which he accuses the latter of wrongfully repossessing his assets kicked off this week at the East African Court of Justice.

Mr Rujugiro, through his company Union Trade Centre contested decisions by Commissions of Abandoned Properties to take over management of his properties in the country.

The EACJ First Instance Division on September 22 heard the case in which Mr Rujugiro accuses the government of “unilaterally” taking over his UTC upscale mall valued at $20 million which houses over 80 shops.

READ: Rwandan tycoon drags govt to regional court

Mr Rujugiro argues that his properties were properly managed and not abandoned as alleged by the commission.

Through his lawyer Francis Gimara, Mr Rujugiro argues that the decision to take over his interests violates the EAC treaty provisions on good governance including adherence to the principles of democracy, rule of law, social justice and maintenance of universally acceptable standards of human rights.”

Citing several articles EAC Treaty, the business mogul says that actions similar to the ones that befell his interests in Rwanda defeat the objectives and purposes for which the Community was established including the obligation to enhance and strengthen partnership with the private sector and civil society in order to achieve sustainable socio-economic and political development.

Mr Rujugiro, who has business interests in Rwanda, Uganda, DR Congo, South Africa and Congo Brazzaville says that he was not informed when the decision to take over management of the mall was made.

“The matter was brought to his attention by his tenants who received a letter from Kigali City Abandoned Property Management Commission directing them to pay rent to it.”

Mr Rujugiro also wants to overturn decisions to take over his residential house in Kicukiro valued at $2 million and his shares in Nshili Kivu Tea Factory.

He maintains that his properties or shares were properly managed regardless of him living outside the country. Rujugiro also wants the government of Rwanda to be restrained from further interference in his business and management of his property and that the Court orders the Respondent to pay general damages as well as cost.

However, Rwanda through Aimable Malala, who is representing the Attorney General, is challenging the competence of the court to hear a matter that was decided at the local governance level.

READ: Rujugiro wealth in limbo as lawyer to cede legal powers

Mr Malala says that the matter is not an action of an institution of the Community but rather it is an action by the City of Kigali, which cannot be equated to actions of the State.

He further contends that Mr Rujugiro’s lawsuit is time barred as he became aware of the process of taking over the mall since July 2013. The EAC treaty indicates that such complaints can only be addressed by the court 2 months after a decision was taken.

The court will rule after assessing the submissions of all parties and putting together the judgment. EACJ will notify the parties involved on when the judgment is ready.