A/HRC/WGAD/2021/45 whose health conditions require specialist treatment are to be transferred to specialized institutions or to civil hospitals. The failure to provide access to adequate medical care violates the right to health. 100. Mr. El-Baker had a kidney problem, which deteriorated owing to lack of access to clean water and the refusal by the authorities for him to be examined by a doctor. While in detention, Ms. Hassan also experienced kidney failure, high blood pressure, deep vein thrombosis and suspected pulmonary embolism. Despite this, she was denied effective medical care. In this regard, the Working Group is of the view that a person fighting a difficult health condition and being kept in poor sanitary and living conditions, without the appropriate medical support when needed, is unlikely to be able to also fight criminal charges in conditions that respect the equality of arms against prosecution. It is important that the State guarantee the health and well-being of all persons in its custody, under any form of deprivation of liberty. The Working Group observes, however, that this did not happen, and it occurred precisely at the time when these individuals needed to prepare a criminal defence and face trial and potential conviction for terrorism-related charges. 101. Furthermore, the Working Group notes that these four individuals have been subjected to pretrial detention for prolonged periods, ranging from three to four years, while awaiting trial. According to international human rights law, in particular article 9 (3) of the Covenant, any person detained while awaiting trial is entitled to be tried without undue delay, or otherwise is to be released. In addition, article 14 (3) (c) guarantees that anyone charged with a criminal offence is entitled to the right to be tried without undue delay. In the absence of a response from the Government, the Working Group finds no legitimate grounds for the delays in the trials against these individuals,11 who were not only subject to criminal prosecution, but were also deprived of their liberty and prevented from carrying out their work as human rights defenders and lawyers. 102. For these reasons, the Working Group finds that the fair trial rights and procedural guarantees of Mr. El-Baker, Mr. Imam and Ms. Hassan, under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Covenant and other relevant human rights standards, were not observed and variously violated. As a result, the Working Group finds that their detention is arbitrary under category III. Category V 103. As regards category V, the source claims that the deprivation of liberty of the four human rights defenders constitutes a violation of international law for reasons of discrimination based on status, and which aims towards or can result in ignoring the equality of human rights. In this regard, it is alleged that the arrest and detention constitute discrimination against them because of their work as lawyers and human rights defenders. 104. On the basis of the facts submitted by the source, the Working Group considers that the four individuals were targeted because of their peaceful activities as human rights defenders. When a detention results from the active exercise of civil and political rights, there is a strong presumption that the detention also constitutes a violation of international law on the grounds of discrimination based on political or other views. 12 105. The Working Group finds that the four human rights defenders were deprived of their liberty on discriminatory grounds – that is, owing to their status as human rights defenders – and on the basis of their political or other opinions in seeking to hold the authorities to account. Their deprivation of liberty violated articles 2 and 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and articles 2 (1) and 26 of the Covenant, and is arbitrary according to category V. The Working Group refers this case to the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders. 11 12 14 See opinions No. 16/2020 and No. 10/2021. Opinion No. 88/2017, para. 43; No. 13/2018, para. 34; and No. 59/2019, para. 79.