A/HRC/WGAD/2021/45 88. The Working Group is satisfied, on the basis of the unrebutted information submitted by the source, that the four individuals were detained as a result of their peaceful exercise of the right to freedom of opinion, expression, assembly and association, and the right to take part in the conduct of public affairs, and that their detention was contrary to articles 19 and 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and articles 19 and 25 of the Covenant. Their detention is arbitrary under category II. The Working Group refers this case to the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, for further consideration of the circumstances of the case and, if necessary, appropriate action. 89. Moreover, the Working Group notes that these four individuals were charged with crimes including publishing false news that endangered the public safety and interest; joining, belonging to or cooperating with a terrorist group; receiving funds to carry out the goals of the terrorist group; misusing social media; and inciting harm to the national economy. In this context, it is worth noting that international human rights law requires that such penal laws are drafted with precision, so that individuals can understand them and adapt their behaviour accordingly. In addition, this guarantees that law enforcement officials, when they are implementing these laws, cannot have uncontrolled, extensive and discretionary interpretation over them.8 The Working Group recalls that broad, vague and imprecise laws can present a risk of providing domestic legal coverage to situations that are considered arbitrary detentions under international human rights law. 9 Category III 90. Given its finding that the deprivation of liberty of Mr. El-Baker, Ms. El-Masry, Mr. Imam and Ms. Hassan is arbitrary under category II, the Working Group wishes to emphasize that no trial against these four human rights defenders and lawyers should take place. Nevertheless, the source has raised serious violations to fair trial and due process rights in the deprivation of liberty of these individuals. The Working Group will address these in turn. 91. The source claims that the deprivation of liberty of three of the four human rights defenders, namely, Mr. El-Baker, Mr. Imam and Ms. Hassan falls within category III as there was total or partial non-observance of the international norms relating to the right to a fair trial, which is alleged to be of such gravity as to give the deprivation of liberty an arbitrary character. More precisely, Mr. El-Baker was questioned in an investigation session in absence of his lawyer, in violation of the right to legal counsel before trial. In addition, he reportedly was subjected to ill-treatment, in violation of his right to freedom from torture and ill-treatment, and was kept in poor detention conditions, in violation of the right to humane conditions of detention. 92. Mr. El-Baker reportedly was suffering from a denial of medical care, in violation of his right to health. Allegedly, this was done deliberately since Mr. El-Baker was not allowed to be examined by a doctor since his detention began. Even when he asked to be examined by a prison doctor, his request was denied. 93. As regards Mr. Imam, the source claims that he was subjected to enforced disappearance, in violation of his right to liberty and right to have access to the outside world, which is essential to the fulfilment of a fair trial. Likewise, it is alleged that Ms. Hassan was subjected to enforced disappearance, in violation of her right to liberty and the right to have access to the outside world, which are essential rights to the fulfilment of a fair trial. 94. The Working Group considers that, on the basis of the facts as submitted by the source, the events leading to the arrest and detention of the four human rights defenders, as well as the detention itself, were characterized by a denial of due process rights. In the case 8 9 12 resolution 70/161, in which the Assembly called upon States to take concrete steps to prevent and put an end to the arbitrary arrest and detention of human rights defenders, and in that regard, strongly urged the release of persons detained or imprisoned, in violation of the obligations and commitments of States under international human rights law, for exercising their human rights and fundamental freedoms. Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 35, paras. 22 and 38. Opinion No. 82/2020, paras. 50 and 59.