110. The Respondent State maintains that the PPO duly investigated the incident. It emphasizes that the investigations carried out have all the specified safeguards for criminal investigation according to the Egyptian legal regime, particularly the impartiality and confidentiality of the investigations, the presence of all opposing parties and their respective defense counsels, who were also informed about the developments of the 111. AC HP R investigations. It submits further that the security agencies have also taken all necessary security measures, whether in terms of securing the demonstrations, or disengaging the demonstrators in accordance with the specified rules and providing the Victims with the necessary level of protection. It adds that the police also exercised their duties in receiving Complaints from demonstrators, filing the necessary reports, and immediately referring the case to the PPO. 112. The Respondent State argues that failure to supply the PPO with the information required coupled with the inconsistencies in the account given by the Victims on the incidents that took place during the demonstrations, cannot be a reason for their inability to identify the perpetrators of the misdemeanor of beating them up. According to the Respondent State, this only indicates that “The circumstances surrounding the incident characterized by a large crowd and the psychological and physical conditions of the female journalists did not permit them to precisely recollect the sequence of events, which in turn did not help the investigation authority to identify the perpetrators.” The Respondent State submits that notwithstanding the above, the PPO and the police took necessary measures to investigate the incident. 32