2. Prohibition Article 65 In cases determined by law, following prohibitions can be pronounced: (….) 6. Prohibition of going outside the country. 89. Having laid down the above provisions applicable to this matter, we now turn to the first bone of contention, that is, the alleged unprocedural manner in which Mr. Rufyikiri was prosecuted before the Anti Corruption Court. 90. From the outset, it is our understanding that our task as regards this matter is not to determine whether or not acts of corruption were committed by Mr. Rufyikiri as the President of the Burundi Centre for Arbitration and Conciliation, but that it is rather to assess whether the act of initiating his prosecution by the Prosecutor General was in conformity with the relevant laws of Burundi. The same test will be carried out later in this judgment when it comes to determine whether the travel ban was issued in accordance with Burundian Laws. 91. In this regard, we find that the pre-cited Law No.1/12 whose aim is to prevent and combat corruption and related offences applies to both public and private institutions (Article 1) and it also creates the AntiCorruption Court and the Special Anti-Corruption Brigade as the institutional entities competent to handle offences of corruption and related offences (Article. 3). In addition, Articles 5 and 6 of Law No.1/12 and Articles 50 and 65 of Law No.1/10 clearly spell out the power invested in the Public Prosecutor to initiate the criminal prosecution of any person, being public or private, suspected of committing an act of corruption. REFERENCE NO.1 OF 2014 Page 29