offices, since the draft law in question is unrelated to work premises, employment places, and work permits of foreign workers contained in the text of the said Article of the draft law. 21. Entering the work premises and employment offices, perusing records relating to foreign workers, checking work permits and the identity of foreign workers, and requesting data, documents, and information required from employers and employment offices or their representatives, or officials responsible for their actual administration, are in fact actions taken against workers, work premises, and their owners covered in Law No. (19) of 2006 concerning Regulating the Labor Market and its amendments, and does not apply to domestic workers by virtue of the nature of the place and the work. In view of the fact that the subject matter of the Article in question - although the connotation does not cover domestic work and workers - is related to conducting inspection, the NIHR refers to the same opinion mentioned in the previous article. 22. Therefore, the NIHR would prefer to rephrase the said article in a manner consistent with the subject of the draft law, as stated above, namely domestic workers, and add the phrase “without prejudice to the provisions of Decree-Law No. (46) of 2002 issuing the Code of Criminal Procedure” at the beginning of Article (20), in order to avoid the possibility of conflicting legal texts regulating the work of the judicial arrest officers contained in the Decree-Law No. (46) of 2002 issuing the Code of Criminal Procedure and its amendments with the draft law under study. Third: Draft law amending Article (56) of the Traffic Law issued by Law No. (23) 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 Article (56) of the Traffic Law issued by Law No. (23) of 2014 (prepared in light of the proposed law “as amended” submitted by the House of Representatives), which comprises two articles and the preamble. The first article adds a seventh paragraph to the text of Article (56) of the Traffic Law, which includes the exemption of persons with disabilities from the amount of conciliation for the offense of disregarding the decisions of the administration on parking in certain places, when it is proved that there were no parking places reserved for them or none was vacant at the time of writing the ticket. The second article is executive relating to the competent authorities, who implement the provisions of this law, and the date of entry into force of the provisions contained therein. 2. Paragraph (7) of Article (56) of the draft law states that, “Persons with disabilities shall be exempted from the conciliation payment in respect of the offense of not abiding by the decisions of the administration on parking in certain places set forth in clause (12) of Article (47) of this Law, when it is proved that there were no parking places allotted for them or none was vacant at the time of writing the ticket.” 3. In principle, the NIHR values the goals and objectives of the draft law, namely, to take into consideration persons with disabilities, who may suffer greatly in moving around, transportation, and running errands in many of the places they visit, in terms of the availability of dedicated parking 22