A/HRC/WGAD/2021/79 70. The right not to suffer enforced disappearance is considered a non-derogable right, even in a state of emergency.24 According to the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, people deprived of liberty must be held only in a place of detention that is officially recognized (art. 17 (2) (c)). States must ensure that no one is held secretly in detention (article 17 (2) (c)) and are to provide the detainee’s family and lawyer with accurate information on the detention (art. 18). 71. Following his appearance before the Supreme State Security Prosecution, Mr. ElElaimy underwent pretrial detention in Tora prison for 15 days, and the detention was periodically renewed pending investigations. Since completing his one-year sentence in one case, Mr. El-Elaimy has been in pretrial detention at Tora prison in another case pending investigations. His detention continues to be renewed approximately every 45 days. 72. Equally, Ms. Abdelhalim’s pretrial detention in the Al-Qanater women’s prison was periodically renewed for one year and 8 months following her arrest until, on 8 February 2021, when it was ordered that she be released in that case. Since her reappearance before the Supreme State Security Prosecution on 9 February 2021 in a new case, Ms. Abdelhalim’s pretrial detention in the Al-Qanater women’s prison has been continually renewed for 15-day periods pending investigations. 73. Both Mr. El-Elaimy and Ms. Abdelhalim have endured pretrial detention for varying periods. The Working Group recalls that, in accordance with article 9 (3) of the Covenant, pretrial detention is to be the exception rather than the norm and is to be ordered for the shortest time possible.25 In other words, liberty is protected under article 9 (3) of the Covenant as the core consideration, with detention as an exception. Detention pending trial must therefore be based on an individualized determination that it is reasonable and necessary for such purposes as to prevent flight, interference with evidence or the recurrence of crime. 74. With regard to Mr. El-Elaimy and Ms. Abdelhalim, the Working Group finds that the Government has violated articles 3 and 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 9 of the Covenant, and principles 11, 37 and 38 of the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment. 75. The Working Group therefore concludes that the detention of Mr. El-Elaimy and Ms. Abdelhalim lacks a legal basis and is therefore arbitrary, falling under category I. Category II 76. The source claims that Mr. El-Elaimy’s and Ms. Abdelhalim’s detention is arbitrary in accordance with category II, because it is derived directly from political work and freedom of expression. The two were originally charged under the case known as the Hope Coalition case of the Supreme State Security Prosecution. In that case, the arrests and detention of the two, along with other political figures and activists, are linked to their involvement in establishing a peaceful political party to run for parliamentary election. 77. After being granted a release in the Hope Coalition case, both Mr. El-Elaimy and Ms. Abdelhalim were accused under new cases in the phenomenon called case rotation. The new cases include, in the case of Ms. Abdelhalim, allegedly organizing a secret cell from inside prison and communicating with leaders of a foreign terrorist group and, in the case of Mr. El-Elaimy, fabricated charges based solely on his political activism and the exercise of his freedom of expression. 78. The Working Group is satisfied with the source’s explanation that deprivation of liberty of Mr. El-Elaimy and Ms. Abdelhalim results from the exercise of universally recognized human rights, in particular the right to freedoms of opinion, expression and peaceful assembly. Freedoms of opinion and expression and of peaceful assembly are fundamental human rights enshrined in articles 19 and 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and articles 19 and 21 of the Covenant. 26 The Government must respect, protect and fulfil the right to hold and express opinions, including those that are not in 24 25 26 10 A/HRC/13/42, para. 50. A/HRC/19/57, paras. 48–58. Yong Joo-Kang v. Republic of Korea (CCPR/C/78/D/878/1999), annex, para. 7.2.