A/HRC/25/60/Add.2 were denied prompt access to medical care. In its reply, the Government stated that the information in the communication was in part based on inaccurate and incomplete information, stating that the protests relevant to Gezi Park exhibit qualities that show that terrorist organizations have been involved in the activities and that the incidents have been manipulated. The Government stated that proper and proportionate force was used by the police to disperse the protesters. The Government stated that allegations of torture and illtreatment do not reflect the truth, and that in “cases where the boundaries of the law were exceeded during the Gezi Park demonstrations, judicial investigations have been immediately initiated by the judicial authorities,” including charges of torture against police officers. The Special Rapporteur appreciates the reply of the Government of the Republic of Turkey and its explanation regarding the investigation into allegations of torture and illtreatment, although he would appreciate more complete information about such investigations, its conditions regarding independence and impartiality, and its results. The Special Rapporteur encourages the Government to continue its engagement with the mandate. He wishes to remind the Government of its obligation to provide full redress, including fair and adequate compensation, and as full rehabilitation as possible to all victims of torture or other ill-treatment. United Arab Emirates (a) JUA 16/04/2013 Case No. ARE 1/2013 State Reply: 10/06/2013 Alleged use of a confession extracted through torture as a key piece of evidence in Mr. Al-Hadidi’s trial, as well as alleged lack of due process and unfair trial practices. 158. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of the United Arab Emirates for its reply, dated 24 May 2013, to this communication in reference to the alleged trial of 94 individuals on charges of state security offences in the Federal Supreme Court in Abu Dhabi, case number 17/2013, as well as the alleged sentencing of Mr. Abdullah Al-Hadidi for his reports on the trial. According to the information received, the 94 individuals were arrested at various moments over the year leading up to the start of trial proceedings which took place in two hearings on 4 and 11 March 2013. The charges against the defendants reportedly included charges of founding and administering an institution aimed at overthrowing the government. The prosecution considers Al-Islah to have a subversive agenda and links to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, an organization banned in the United Arab Emirates. Sources have informed that no timeframe or schedule has been set out for the trial, leading to periods of up to one year spent in pre-trial detention. A confession by Mr. Ahmad Ghaith Al-Suwaidi allegedly constitutes a central piece of evidence supporting the charges, though it was allegedly extracted through torture. It is further alleged that several of the detainees were kept in conditions that, if found to be accurate, may amount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Reports allege that some detainees were kept in small cells of 2.5 x 3 meters with lights kept on during the night, deprived of virtually any clothing despite powerful air-conditioning being on, had access to insufficient toilet facilities, were kept in lengthy interrogation sessions while blindfolded and in some cases subject to physical abuse including beatings and the extraction of fingernails. It is alleged that during court hearings, detainees including Messrs. Mohammed Abdulrazzaq Alsidiq, Ahmed Al-Zaabi and Essa Al-Sari reported having been targeted for such practices. It is further reported that a number of detainees displayed physical signs of torture during hearings, and that at the hearing on 11 March, relatives of Mr. Essa Al-Sari were alarmed at the deterioration of his mental health since being detained. There are also allegations of irregularities which violated international minimum standards for the conduct of a fair trial. The judges are appointed by the ruling royal families of the United Arab Emirates, who have reportedly delivered numerous statements to national news media condemning the defendants in case 17/2013. There are 115