122 Legal Digest of International Fair Trial Rights if a party and/or her/his legal counsel feel that they have had inadequate time to prepare, it is incumbent upon them to request an adjournment.501 6.3.5 The right to adequate facilities and disclosure of information about the case The right to “adequate facilities” must include access to documents and other evidence the accused requires to prepare her/his case as well as the opportunity to engage and communicate with counsel (See also 6.3.3).502 In the context of criminal proceedings, the European Commission on Human Rights has held that, read together with the principle of the equality of arms (See also 6.1), the right to adequate facilities for the preparation of one’s defence in Article 6(3)(b) of the ECHR imposes an obligation on prosecuting and investigating authorities to disclose any material in their possession, or to which they could gain access, which may assist the accused in exonerating her/himself or in obtaining a reduction in sentence.503 In Foucher v France, for example, the refusal by the prosecutor to give access to the case file, and to allow copies of documents contained in it to be made, by a defendant who was representing himself was concluded to prevent the defendant from preparing an adequate defence.504 In van Marcke v Belgium, however, the Human Rights Committee observed that the right to a fair hearing does not, in itself, require that the prosecution bring before the court all information it reviewed in preparation of a criminal case, unless the failure to make the information available to the courts and the accused would amount to a denial of justice, such as by withholding exonerating evidence.505 The Human Rights Committee has explained that disclosure must include documents and other evidence that the prosecution plans to offer in court against the accused or that are exculpatory.506 Exculpatory material should be understood, the Human Rights Committee has explained, as including not only material establishing innocence but also other evidence that could assist the defence, such as indications that a confession was not voluntary (See also 5.2). In cases of a claim that evidence was obtained in violation of the prohibition against torture or other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, information about the circumstances in which such evidence was obtained must be made available to 501 Henry v Jamaica, HRC Communication 230/1987, UN Doc CCPR/C/43/D/230/1987 (1991), para 8.2; Wright v Jamaica, HRC Communication 349/1989, UN Doc CCPR/C/45/D/349/1989 (1992), para 8.4; Williams v Jamaica, HRC Communication 561/1993, UN Doc CCPR/C/59/D/561/1993 (1997), para 9.3; Adams v Jamaica, HRC Communication 607/1994, UN Doc CCPR/C/58/D/607/1994 (1996), para 8.3; Henry v Jamaica, HRC Communication 610/1995, UN Doc CCPR/C/64/D/610/1995 (1998), para 7.5; Reece v Jamaica, HRC Communication 796/1998, UN Doc CCPR/C/78/D/796/1998 (2003), para 7.2; and Marques de Morais v Angola, HRC Communication 1128/2002, UN Doc CCPR/C/83/D/1128/2002 (2005), para 5.6. 502 UN Human Rights Committee, CCPR General Comment 13 (1984), para 9. 503 Jespers v Belgium [1981] European Commission of Human Rights, para 58. See also Rowe and Davis v the United Kingdom [2000] ECHR 91, para 60. 504 Foucher v France [1997] ECHR 13, paras 34–36. 505 Van Marcke v Belgium, HRC Communication 904/2000, UN Doc CCPR/C/81/D/904/2000 (2004), para 8.3. 506 UN Human Rights Committee, CCPR General Comment 32 (2007), para 33.