A/HRC/25/60/Add.2 torture. Moreover, Mr Mohamed Al-Maskati reportedly faces trial on charges of “participation in illegal protests,” after his co-operation with the United Nations during the Universal Periodic Review of the Kingdom of Bahrain. In this context, the Special Rapporteur reiterates that each government shall guarantee that no persons are deprived arbitrarily of their liberty and granted a fair proceeding before an independent and impartial tribunal, in accordance with articles 9 and 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), and articles 9 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Further, the Special Rapporteur stresses that each Government has the obligation to protect the right to physical and mental integrity of all persons as set forth inter alia in the UDHR, the ICCPR, and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT). Additionally, the Government of Bahrain is reminded that paragraph 1 of Human Rights Council Resolution 16/23 condemns all forms of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and calls upon governments to implement an absolute and non-derogable prohibition of it. The Special Rapporteur reiterates article 12 of the Convention Against Torture, which requires the competent authorities to undertake a prompt and impartial investigation wherever there are reasonable grounds to believe that torture has been committed, and article 7 of the Convention Against Torture, which requires States Parties to prosecute suspected perpetrators of torture. The Special Rapporteur requests an additional response from the Government of Bahrain regarding the aforementioned mistreatments and detentions and reminds the government that individual freedoms shall be protected. The Special Rapporteur further request that should the Government’s investigation find the allegations to be correct that any person responsible be held accountable. (d) JUA 14/08/2013 Case No. BHR 5/2013 State reply: 04/09/2013 2013 Alleged restrictions of freedom of expression and freedom of assembly following 22 recommendations to amend the anti-terrorism Law no. 58 of 2006. 18. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government for its reply dated 4 September 2013 to allegations regarding harsh new anti-terrorism laws recently passed by the Government. According to the information received, the National Assembly endorsed 22 recommendations on 28 July 2013 and his Majesty King Hamad bin Isa Al-Khalifa agreed to their implementation on 29 July 2013. It is alleged that some of these recommendations have already been adopted, while adoption of the others is imminent. The recommendations include provisions for revoking citizenship of those who carry out terrorist crimes; the imposition of harsher sentences on anyone involved in acts of terrorism; banning sit-ins, public gatherings in the capital; the extension of security forces powers to protect society from terrorist acts; the imposition of harsher sentences for anyone propagating illegal information in social media networks; the ability for the authorities to take legal action against political associations which incite and support acts of violence and terrorism, and the ability to take all possible measures to impose peace and security, amongst others. The Law no. 58 of 2006 has been the subject of two earlier communications sent on 29 March (AL BHR 3/2006) and 30 June 2006 (UA BHR 5/2006), see A/HRC/4/26/Add.1, paras. 1415. The government responded to these allegations by stressing the need to respond to growing instances of terrorist activities as well as to ensure that not all measures within the allegation have been adopted due to reservations about lack of human rights protections. The Government further reports that measures that have been adopted provide adequate limitations and definitions to criminal sanctions so as to prevent abuse; the Government emphasized further its commitment to promote and implement human rights protections moving forward. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government for its reply to the concerns expressed, but would also like to stress further that the prohibition of torture is absolute and non-derogable. Thus no grounds of national security concerns can justify policies which promote or encourage the use of torture. Such is expressed in article 2(2) of the Convention Against Torture, which provides that no exceptional circumstances 13