It is important to bear in mind that, since a defendant is deemed innocent until proven guilty, detention can never be used as an anticipation of criminal punishment, but merely as a measure to ensure the successful conduct of criminal proceedings (ensuring the defendant’s presence at the trial and the proper collection and administration of evidence). Article 7 of the law on the Serious Crimes Court clearly establishes five procedural grounds on which the defendant may be deprived of liberty prior to a conviction. However, ISTIQLAL monitors however were under the impression that in some cases defendants were kept in detention as a form of deterrence, since in their decisions to detain and then release the defendants, judges did not make reference to any needs to ensure their presence at the trial; decisions to detain or release, on the contrary, seemed to be grounded on the judge’s conviction that the defendant had spent a time in detention that was a sufficient deterrent for the crime committed. ISTIQLAL monitors observed some instances involving pre-trial detention where defendants charged with lenient offences decided to plead guilty at the trial just to be released: after pleading guilty, defendants received pecuniary sentences or suspended prison sentences, as a further proof that detention may have been a disproportionate, unnecessary measure in the first place. ISTIQLAL believes that Courts should carefully assess when pre-trial detention is necessary, since resorting to it as a default pre-trial measure may constitute an undue limitation of individuals’ right to personal liberty. 5. Right to be tried in one’s presence One of the most prominent guarantees of the rights of the accused is their presence at the trial. According to Article 243 of the CPC, the accused may not be excluded from the session unless s/he creates a disturbance to the Court’s activities. The CPC also establishes clear provisions regarding the cases when a Court may proceed against a defendant in absentia. As already mentioned above (chapter 3) ISTIQLAL observed many hearings where defendants held in pre-trial detention were not brought to the hearing. However, in no such case did the Court proceed with the hearing in the absence of the defendant; rather, the Court adjourned the hearing in order to ensure the presence of the defendant at the next hearing. While this caused delays in criminal proceedings, by doing so the Courts upheld the defendants’ right to be tried in their presence. 6. reywp pa ei RitRisirpir eg t thgiR Every person charged with a criminal offence is entitled to appoint a lawyer. This fundamental right is enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution, which states “Any person accused in a criminal case shall be represented by a lawyer.” This guarantee includes the right of the defendant to choose an attorney of his/her choice, and the right to free legal aid for indigent defendants. 43