Advance unedited version A/HRC/WGAD/2022/ article 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and which draws on the right of detainees to be given the time and facilities necessary to prepare and present his/her defence with the counsel for when the trial takes place. 97. The Working Group finds that the denial of the right of Messrs. Abdel Aziz, Sahloob, Khalil, and Ali to communicate with their lawyers constitutes a violation of their right to effective assistance of counsel and of the equality of arms principle, in violation of articles 10 and 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 14 (3) of the Covenant. Right to be free from torture and ill treatment 98. According to the source, Messrs. Abdel Aziz, Sahloob, Khalil, and Ali were subjected to torture and ill-treatment, especially during the time they were enforcedly disappeared, in order to coerce them into confessing against themselves. Specifically, the source notes that the four detainees were subjected to treatment including being handcuffed, blindfolded, beaten, and electrocuted, and that such treatment caused them severe body pain and health deterioration. Allegedly, though they reported such treatment, no action was taken by the prosecution or the judges. The Government has chosen not to rebut these allegations, despite having an opportunity to do so. 99. Detainees should be protected from any practices that violate their right to be free from any acts which could cause severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental and which are inflicted intentionally on a person. This has been clearly stated in the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. According to the Committee against Torture, the right to freedom from torture and other ill-treatment or punishment is absolute. This applies in all circumstances and may never be restricted, including during times of war or states of emergency. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, including threats of terrorism or other violent crime, may be invoked to justify torture or other ill-treatment. Such prohibition applies irrespective of the offence allegedly committed by the accused person. 100. Moreover, the source claims that the four individuals’ lawyers reported the acts of torture and ill-treatment when their clients appeared before a judge. Nevertheless, no action was taken. The Working Group considers that the courts should have ordered a separate and independent investigation into the alleged torture and ill-treatment. The failure by the judge to intervene when the allegations of torture or ill-treatment were brought to him amounts to a violation of the right to be tried by an independent and impartial tribunal under article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,15 article 14 of the Covenant, and articles 12, 13 and 14 of the Convention against Torture. The Working Group also reiterates that the admission into evidence of a statement allegedly obtained through torture or ill-treatment renders the entire proceedings unfair, regardless of whether other evidence was available to support the verdict, and would constitute a violation of the right not to be compelled to confess guilt under article 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.16 101. The Working Group refers this case to the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers and the Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Right to health 102. The source alleges that the lives of Messrs. Abdel Aziz, Sahloob, Khalil, and Ali are at grave risk due to the prison authorities’ intentional prevention from accessing medical examination and treatment in prison. The Government has not rebutted these allegations though it had the opportunity to do so. 103. The right to attain the highest standard of physical and mental health is protected under article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which Egypt ratified in 1982, article 16 of the African Charter, and rules 24, 25, 27 and 30 of the 15 16 Opinions No. 46/2017, para. 25; No. 53/2018, para. 77 (b); No. 30/2018, para. 49; No. 31/2020, para. 56; and No. 62/2020, para. 88. See also A/HRC/29/26/Add.2, paras. 53 and 109. Opinions No. 43/2012, para. 51; No. 34/2015, para. 28; No. 52/2018, para. 79 (i); No. 73/2019, para. 91; and No. 61/2020, para. 86. 13