47. The Court is of the view that a physical search of the Applicant's representative in conformity with normal security practices to access the prison would not infringe on the rights of the Applicant or that of her representatives. However, any search of the documents of the Applicant's Representative would be in contravention international human rights norms before this Court. 48.In dealing with the question of the search of a lawyer's documents, the European Court of Human Rights in the case of André and Another v. France (Application no. 18603/03) held: “The Court considers that searches and seizures at the premises of a lawyer undoubtedly breach professional secrecy, which is the basis of the relationship of trust existing between a lawyer and his client. Furthermore, the safeguarding of professional secrecy is in particular the corollary of the right of a lawyer's client not to incriminate himself, which presupposes that the authorities resorting evidence obtained fo seek to prove through their case methods of without coercion or oppression in defiance of the will of the “person charged” 49. In addition to accepted standards under international law, the Court further notes that the Respondent's own national laws namely Articles 50, 54, 56 and 57 of Law 83/2013 dated 11 September organization and operation of the Rwandan guarantee the right of lawyers to 2013 pertaining to the creation, Bar Association, communicate with recognize and detained clients, professional secrecy and provide for procedures of search of an advocates office. 50. The Court therefore holds that the Respondent is under an obligation to take necessary measures to facilitate access to the Applicant by her representatives. Further, that the Respondent should refrain from taking any measures that would infringe on the Applicant’s representative’s rights to professional secrecy and to communicate freely with the Applicant. 10