(registered under number 16332) to legally represent a number of individuals, including the First Victim, whose names had appeared in the local press as chief suspects in the Taba bombings‟ investigation. The lawyers received no response. The First Victim was denied representation at interrogations for a period of 5 months until 24 March 2005. The Second and Third Victims had no access to counsel until 26 March 2006, when they first appeared in court. 211. Moreover, even at the beginning of the trial, all three were denied the opportunity to consult with counsel privately, in order to prepare their defence. The lawyer client communication, as alleged by the Complainants and not refuted by the Respondents, took place through bars of the court room, in the presence of and within earshot security officials. The African Commission therefore finds that the complete denial of access to counsel before their appearance in court and the restrictive access thereafter violated the right to counsel and the right to a defence (see below) under Article 7(1) (c).127 212. Furthermore, in interpreting Article 7 of the African Charter, the African Commission has stated that “any confession or other evidence obtained by any form of coercion or force may not be admitted as evidence or considered as probative of any fact at trial or in sentencing.” 128 In Malawi African Association V. Mauritania, this Commission has held that “any confession or admission obtained during incommunicado detention shall be considered to have been obtained by coercion.”129 213. These principles correspond with other international human rights norms, addressed in relation to torture and ill-treatment, under which 127 See Malawi African Association v. Mauritania (above, n. 40), para. 96. 128 Principles and Guidelines on Fair Trial (above n. Section N(6)(d)(1). 129 Ibid., Section N(6)(d)(1). 65