Recommendation (E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.6) Steps taken in previous years Situation in during visit in 2005 (See A/HRC/4/33/Add.2, A/HRC/7/3/Add.2, Information received in the (See E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.6) A/HRC/10/44/Add.5 and A/HRC/16/52/Add.2) reporting period - Police retain the discretion to be present during meetings between lawyers and their clients, according to ―necessity and circumstances‖; - In cases involving ―state secrets‖, the CPL requires that the appointment of a lawyer and meetings between lawyers and clients are approved by the ―investigative organ‖; - The revised State Secrets Law (SSL) from 2010 fails to make provisions for the right of defendants suspected of a ―state secrets‖ crime to access their lawyer.6 - In more than a dozen cases investigated by NGOs, Falun Gong practitioners were either told they were not allowed to hire a legal counsel of their choice due to the nature of their case, or were not permitted access to their chosen or appointed lawyer without permission of the police or security organs. Lawyers who represent, or seek to represent Falun Gong practitioners, have come under intense harassment and intimidation by the authorities, and two had their licences permanently revoked in 2010 after walking out in protest at irregularities during a trial of a Falun Gong practitioner. - In many other politically sensitive cases investigated by NGOs lawyers are intimidated and harassed, pressurized not to represent politically sensitive groups such as Tibetans, Uighurs and Falun Gong practitioners and prevented from seeing their clients or accessing necessary documents to mount a full defence. 6 The Standing Committee of the National People‘s Congress adopted revisions to the State Secrets Law on April 29, 2010. 17 A/HRC/19/61/Add.3 While the revised CPL of 1997 provides that People‘s Courts are to ―exercise judicial power independently in accordance with law‖, the proceedings of local courts are routinely interfered with by local political