consistent with international humanitarian law. 436 Here the UK had not derogated from its ECHR obligations. B. Procedural safeguards Reasons for Detention 28. Persons deprived of their liberty should be informed of the reasons of their arrest at the time of the arrest irrespective of the nature or any justifications for the arrest.437 29. The reasons must be detailed, prompt and comprehensible438 and include factual details regarding the substance of the complaint, not just the legal grounds, such as the wrongful act and the identity of the alleged victim, if any. So, for example, in Drescher Caldas v Uruguay, the Human Rights Committee considered it insufficient to simply inform the detainee ‘that he was being arrested under the prompt security measures without any indication of the substance of the complaint against him’.439 30. The reasons must be given in a language that the arrested person understands.440 31. In the case of children, notice of and the reasons for the arrest should also be provided directly to their parents, guardians, or legal representatives. 441 32. The right to be informed about any charges applies to criminal prosecutions, as well as to military prosecutions or other proceedings directed at criminal punishment.442 33. Notice of charges shall be sufficient to facilitate the determination of the legality of or appropriateness of the detention and does not have to meet the 436 Hassan v UK, European Court, 16 September 2014. Human Rights Committee, Communication 1460/2006, Yklymova v. Turkmenistan, 20 July 2009, para. 7.2; Communication 414/1990, Mika Miha v. Equatorial Guinea, 8 July 1994, para. 6.5; Communication 188/1984, Martínez Portorreal v. Dominican Republic, 5 November 1987, paras. 9.2, 11; Concluding observations, Canada CCPR/C/CAN/CO/5 (2006), para. 14. 438 Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, A/HRC/8/4, para 27. Communication 43/1979, Adolfo Dreschler Caldas v Uruguay, 21 July 1983. 439 Communication 43/79 Drescher Caldas v Uruguay, 11 January 1979, para 13.2. See also Communication 1177/2003, Wenga and Shandwe v. Democratic Republic of the Congo, 17 March 2006, para. 6.2; Communication 1128/2002, Marques de Morais v. Angola, 29 March 2005, para. 6.2. 440 Communication 868/1999, Wilson v. The Philippines, 30 October 2003, paras. 3.3, 7.5. 441 Human Rights Committee, Communication 1402/2005, Krasnova v. Kyrgyzstan, 29 March 2011, para. 8.5; General Comment No. 32, CCPR/C/GC/32 (2007), para. 42; see Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No. 10, CRC/C/GC/10 (2007), para. 48. 442 Communication 1782/2008, Aboufaied v. Libya, 21 March 2012, para. 7.6; Communication 1649/2007, El Abani v. Algeria, paras. 7.6, 7.8. 437 87