Applicant does not prove any loss to be redeemed or denial to be claimed; he does no more than cite “legal fees and honorariums of lawyer”, as the one and sole justification for his request. In the instant case, the transgressed right is restored, and that suffices for the Court. Like other courts, this Court is of the view that having found that there was violation of a right may constitute in itself a fair and sufficient satisfaction, and a relief for the injury suffered. Thus, the Court shall reject the application for compensation as filed. AS TO COSTS Pursuant to Article 66 of its Rules of Procedure, the Court holds that considering the circumstances of the case, it shall be normal for Burkina Faso to bear the costs. FOR THESE REASONS The Court, Adjudicating in a public session, after hearing both Parties, in a matter on human rights violation, in first and last resort; As to formal presentation, Dismisses as ill-founded the objections raised by Burkina Faso regarding incompetence of the Court to sit on the case and lis pendence of the case before another court; As to merits, Adjudges that the Applicant’s right to the free choice of his lawyers was violated; Orders, as a result, Burkina Faso to restore the Applicant back to his right to free choice of counsel; Adjudges that given the current state of affairs, there is no ground for making a declaration on the recorded telephone conversations as alleged; Dismisses the Applicant’s request for monetary compensation as ill-founded; Asks Burkina Faso to bear the costs. 17