7. The NIHR also attended two sessions (2) before the Supreme Criminal Court of Appeal, in a trial for two persons accused of murdering a police officer and attempting the murder of other members of the security forces by carrying out a terrorist bombing. A final sentence of capital punishment has been ordered for both of the convicted. However, the Court of Cassation referred the case to the Court of Appeal to review after accepting an application for a reconsideration lodged by the Public Prosecution pursuant to the legal procedures followed in this regard. 8. With respect thereto, the NIHR asserts that attending the trial sessions is to examine and establish the validity of the judicial proceedings and the provision of fair trial guarantees in the trial of the accused. The right to a fair trial is one of the standards of international human rights law and a fundamental pillar of the fair trial stipulated in international instruments starting with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article (11.1) thereof stipulates that, “… he (the offender) has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense”. Followed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, in which Article (14/3-B) stipulates that, “To have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defense …” The Constitution of the Kingdom of Bahrain also affirms the right of defense in Paragraph (c) of Article No. (20), which stipulates that, “...in which he is assured of the necessary guarantees to exercise the right of defense…” 9. In a related context, the NIHR has been keen - since the lawsuit in case No. (1/terrorism/2017) was referred to the High Military Court of the military system of justice on 23 October 2017 (2) until the sentence was issued in the session held on 25 December 2017, which amounted to eight (8) sessions - to attend all the hearings in order to monitor the proceedings of the trial and to ensure that they conform to national, regional, and international standards related to fair trial. In addition, the NIHR attended five (5) trial sessions of the Supreme Military Court of Appeals, which issued its verdict on 21 February 2018. 10. Moreover, the NIHR, in continuation of its concern, and in order to reassure the public about the proceedings, has released public statements on all the hearings that it has attended, making observations regarding fair trial guarantees in such sessions. 11. The NIHR believes that referring the case to the High Military Court of the Bahrain Defense Force is consistent with the fact that it is a competent and independent court established by Decree-Law No. (34) of 2002, issuing the Military Judiciary Law, as amended by Law No. (12) of 2017. 12. The NIHR noted that the High Military Court, which is competent under the law to hear the present case, has taken into account safeguarding the principle of presumption of innocence and that the accused is presumed innocent until proved guilty under a fair trial, in which the accused has the necessary guarantees to exercise the right to defense at all stages of the investigation and trial. In addition, both defendants, on whom the judgment has been issued in their presence, exercised the right to have a defense attorney with their consent, and the hearings were public, and in conformity with the provisions of the Constitution and relevant national laws and international and regional human rights instruments. (2) F  or more information: Fact-Finding Report of the National Institution for Human Rights on the Allegations of Torture and Enforced Disappearance Crimes against a number of Convicts in the case known as (1/Terrorism/2017); NIHR’s website at www.nihr.org.bh. 50