Section II Advisory Opinions Submitted by the National Institution for Human Rights to the House of Representatives Valuing the efforts of the House of Representatives pertaining to human rights issues, given that it is the constitutional institution that guarantees public rights and freedoms, the NIHR received during the timeframe of the Report ten requests to obtain its opinion, as follows: First: A draft law amending some provisions of the Reform and Rehabilitation Institution Law, issued by Law No. (18) of 2014 (prepared in light of the proposed law “as amended” submitted by the House of Representatives) 1. The NIHR referred its advisory opinion on the draft law amending some provisions of the Reform and Rehabilitation Institution Law, promulgated by Law No. (18) of 2014, consisting of three articles, as well as the preamble. The First Article includes replacing the text of the second paragraph of Article (41), the Second Article adds a new second paragraph to Article (27) of the Reform and Rehabilitation Institution Law, issued by Law No. (18) of 2014, and the Third Article is an executive article. 2. The second paragraph of Article (41) of the draft law states that, “…the Director of the Institution may, after the approval of the Minister or whoever he may so delegate, authorize the inmate to leave the institution to visit his/her family in the event of the death of a relative up to the second degree. The visit may include attending the funeral of the deceased or the mourning ceremony. In addition, the inmate may be permitted to leave in situations which the Administration of the Institution deems necessary.” 3. The new second paragraph of Article (27), as in the draft law, states that, “... the Administration of the Center shall organize periodic meetings and assemblies for preaching and religious guidance by specialists appointed by the official authorities to promote the inmates spiritually and ideologically in a moderate and proper manner, to reintegrate them well into society after the end of their prison sentence.” 4. The NIHR sees that the original text contained in the second paragraph of Article (41) of Law No. (18) of 2014 issuing the Reform and Rehabilitation Institution Law can achieve the desired outcome of the proposed amendment and gives discretionary power to those in charge of implementation on a case-by-case basis; and that excessive interpretation of the texts may limit the executive body. Therefore, there is no purpose of the amendment as its justification is already achieved in the original articles. 5. Concerning the new second paragraph of Article (27) of Law No. (18) of 2014 issuing the Reform and Rehabilitation Institution Law, the NIHR considers that the purposes of the proposed addition are achieved in the texts contained in the same Law and its Implementing Regulation issued by 15