to specialized institutions or to civil hospitals. In accordance with article 9 of the ICCPR, everyone has the right to liberty and security of person, and no one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention. Article 9 further requires that anyone arrested or detained on a criminal charge be brought promptly before a judge or other officer authorized by law and be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release. In addition, we bring the attention of your Excellency’s Government to article 14 of the ICCPR, which guarantees the right to due process and a fair trial. We wish to remind the Government of your Excellency that, in accordance with the jurisprudence of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, arresting or detaining an individual as punishment for the legitimate exercise of rights protected under the ICCPR may be arbitrary. Given the reported lack of adequate medical care, exacerbated by Dr. Aboulfotouh's prolonged solitary confinement, we also refer to articles 1, 2 and 16 of the Convention against Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (CAT), ratified by Egypt on 25 June 1986. The Special Rapporteur on torture has pointed out that prolonged solitary confinement runs afoul of the absolute prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment (A/66/268). The Mandela Rules prohibits the use of indefinite or prolonged solitary confinement, which is defined as solitary confinement for a period of more than 15 consecutive days. In accordance with Rule 45 of the Mandela Rules, solitary confinement must remain exceptional and should only be used as a last resort and for as short a time as possible. Further, solitary confinement must be subject to independent review and authorization by a competent authority. In this context, we also refer to our previous observation that detention pending trial must be based on an individualized determination that is reasonable and necessary, taking into account all the circumstances for such purposes as to prevent flight, interference with evidence or the recurrence of crime. Courts must examine whether alternatives to pre-trial detention would render detention unnecessary in the particular case and periodic examinations of whether it continues to be reasonable and necessary in the light of possible alternatives should be undertaken. In relation to the compatibility of the state of emergency with international law obligations, the discretionary powers of emergency courts and the curtailment of judicial guarantees, including the denial of the possibility to appeal their decisions, we remind your Excellency's Government that States must ensure that emergency measures are consistent with the State's human rights treaty obligations and that it remains an absolute obligation of the State to protect non-derogable rights (A/HRC/35/37, paras 74-78). With regard to the seemingly vague and ambiguous charges brought against Dr. Aboulfotouh, we reiterate that the principle of legal certainty expressed in article 11 of the UDHR and in the ICCPR requires that criminal laws be sufficiently precise so that it is clear what types of conduct and actions constitute a criminal offense and what the consequences of committing such an offense would be. Vaguely and broadly worded provisions undermine the principle of legality, cannot qualify as 9