E/CN.4/1995/31/Add.3 page 15 Annex II DECISION No. 48/1994 (BHUTAN) Communication addressed to the Royal Government of Bhutan on 14 October 1991. Concerning: the other. Tek Nath Rizal on the one hand and the Kingdom of Bhutan on 1. The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, in accordance with the methods of work adopted by it and in order to carry out its task with discretion, objectivity and independence, forwarded to the Government concerned the above-mentioned communication received by it and found to be admissible, in respect of allegations of arbitrary detention reported to have occurred. 2. The Working Group notes with appreciation the information forwarded by the Government concerned in respect of the cases in question within 90 days of the transmittal of the letter by the Working Group. 3. With a view to taking a decision the Working Group considers if the cases in question fall into one or more of the following three categories: I. Cases in which the deprivation of freedom is arbitrary, as it manifestly cannot be linked to any legal basis (such as continued detention beyond the execution of the sentence or despite an amnesty act, etc.); or II. Cases of deprivation of freedom when the facts giving rise to the prosecution or conviction concern the exercise of the rights and freedoms protected by articles 7, 13, 14, 18, 19, 20 and 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and articles 12, 18, 19, 21, 22, 25, 26 and 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; or III. Cases in which non-observance of all or part of the international provisions relating to the right to a fair trial is such that it confers on the deprivation of freedom, of whatever kind, an arbitrary character. 4. In the light of the allegations made the Working Group welcomes the cooperation of the Royal Government of Bhutan. Apart from responding to the allegations made the Government of Bhutan has kept the Working Group informed of all relevant developments that took place in the case of Tek Nath Rizal culminating in the judgement rendered by the High Court at Thimphu, Bhutan on 6 November 1993. The Working Group believes that it is in a position to take a decision on the facts and circumstances of the case in question, taking into consideration all relevant material including the allegations made and the Government’s reply. 5. According to the source Tek Nath Rizal was arrested in October/November 1989 for his alleged involvement in the writing and distribution of a booklet titled "Bhutan: We want Justice" which was critical