sub-issues referring to impugned acts allegedly committed by the 1st Respondents, namely, the prosecution of Mr. Rufyikiri before the AntiCorruption Court, the travel ban imposed to the same Mr. Rufyikiri and his disbarment from the Roll of the Advocates. These acts will be reviewed in light of the relevant Burundian Laws referred to us by both parties. The said laws are Law No.1/12 of 18th April 2006 establishing measures on preventing and combating corruption and related offences; Law No. 1/10 of 03rd April 2013 on the Revised Criminal Procedure Code; Law No. 1/014 of 29th November 2002 on the Reform of the Statute of the legal profession and Law No. 1/05 of 22nd April 2009 on the Revised Penal Code. 87. Regarding the prosecution and the prohibition from travelling, in paragraph 7 of Mr. Sylvestre Nyandwi’s affidavit, it is deponed that “on 2/12/2013, the Public Prosecutor to the Anti-Corruption Court took measure to ban Mr. Isidore Rufykiri to leave the Country in order to get him whenever required in the prosecution of the penal case No. RMPCAC 2066 KI opened in the anti-corruption Court in accordance with Law No. 1/12 of 18th April 2006 on measures of preventing and combating corruption and related offences as well as Law No.1/10 of 3rd April 2013 on Penal procedure Code of Burundi.” 88. In order to determine whether the two aforementioned acts were done in accordance with the Burundian laws, we found that Articles 1, 3, 5, 6 and 10 of the Anti-Corruption Law No.1/12 (supra); Articles 47, 50 and 65 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Articles 60 and 65 of the Penal Code are relevant in addressing the matter at hand. For clarity’s sake, we are respectively reproducing these provisions below. REFERENCE NO.1 OF 2014 Page 26