A/HRC/WGAD/2021/79 anyone who is arrested should be clearly informed of the reasons behind the arrest and of any charges against him or her. 32. The source alleges that, by examining the details of their cases, it is evident that Ms. Abdelhalim and Mr. El-Elaimy were arrested without being shown an arrest warrant or being provided with a legal explanation of the reasons behind their arrests; therefore, their right to liberty was violated. 33. In addition, the right not to suffer enforced disappearance is considered one of the non-derogable rights, even in a state of emergency. 3 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 (art. 17 (2) (c)) and provide the detainee’s family and lawyer with accurate information on the detention (art. 18). 34. The source claims that Ms. Abdelhalim was forcibly disappeared for five days, before she appeared before the Supreme State Security Prosecution, preventing her family from knowing her fate and whereabouts. 35. Moreover, the cases of Ms. Abdelhalim and Mr. El-Elaimy allegedly show a pattern of systematic violation of rights practised by the authorities, which consists of subjecting individuals to prolonged arbitrary detention on baseless charges to deprive them of their liberty indefinitely. 36. Reportedly, after being granted a release in the Hope Coalition case, Ms. Abdelhamid was accused in a new case, involving fabricated charges, including organizing a secret cell from prison and communicating with the leaders of a foreign terrorist group. Ms. Abdelhamid was accused of these crimes allegedly committed while she was in detention at the AlQanater women’s prison, which confirms their baselessness. 37. Mr. El-Elaimy has allegedly been accused in several cases, involving fabricated charges, based solely on his political activism and freedom of expression, including the Hope Coalition case. Reportedly, the authorities have been systematically accusing political prisoners in several cases, so that, if they are granted release in one, they will continue to be detained in one or more other cases. 38. The source claims that the cases of Ms. Abdelhamid and Mr. El-Elaimy are both illustrative of a systematic practice that has come to be known as the rotation of cases. Through this practice, the authorities accuse political prisoners in several cases, or directly after their release, they are accused in a new case (or cases) to keep them in indefinite detention. In most of the new cases, the charges are a revived version of the charges in the previous cases. ii. Category II 39. The source claims that Mr. El-Elaimy’s detention is arbitrary, falling within category II, because it is derived directly from his political work and freedom of expression. 40. Article 25 of the Covenant states that every citizen has the right and the opportunity to take part in the conduct of public affairs and to vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections. According to the Human Rights Committee, as stated in its general comment No. 25 (1996), the conduct of public affairs relates to the exercise of political power, in particular the exercise of legislative, executive and administrative powers.4 41. The source alleges that details of Mr. El-Elaimy’s Hope Coalition case reveal that his arrest and detention, along with those of other political figures and activists in June 2019, are linked to their involvement in establishing a peaceful political party to run for parliamentary election. This is a violation of their right to participate in public affairs, protected by article 25 of the Covenant. 3 4 International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, art. 1 (2); and A/HRC/13/42, para. 50. Para. 5. 5