  Does your Member State have overseas territories or a need for geographical derogations, (eg. EU anti-piracy / smuggling operations?) Are delays in access to a lawyer permitted? Are any other restrictions permitted? - Your answers here  The Directive permits derogation from the substantive aspect of Article 3 (access to a private meeting before questioning, presence of the lawyer in questioning etc.) in urgent cases where (a) there is an urgent need to avert serious adverse consequences for other persons and (b) immediate action is needed to prevent substantial jeopardy to criminal proceedings. In accordance with Article 8, these derogations should be strictly limited in time, should not go beyond what is necessary, and should not unduly prejudice the rights of the defence. The issue is currently under consideration in the case of Ibrahim and Others v. United Kingdom, which is before the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR. See Fair Trials’ intervention in that case, referred to in Part III of this Toolkit. The Recitals state that questioning during the derogation may be carried out for the sole purpose and to the extent necessary to obtain information that is essential to one of the two above justifications. In Fair Trials’ opinion, any information obtained should not be used in the substantive criminal proceedings (see further on remedies below). Your answers here Please identify the relevant national legal provisions  Article 3(6) Article 8 31, 32      Are derogations available from the rights specified in Article 3 of the Directive? On what grounds? What questioning is permissible during the absence of the lawyer? - 42