National Institution for Human Rights – Kingdom of Bahrain e. As regards the complaint about not providing the assistance of counsel, NIHR contacted the Ministry of Interior, but no response was received in respect of the complaint. f. As for the complaint received about the request for compensation for the damage caused by the convicting judgment rendered by the Court of First Instance and the acquittal in the Court of Appeal, the complaint was dismissed since no rights were infringed upon, as this procedure complies with the principle of litigation on two degrees, which is one of the fair trial guarantees. The essence of this principle is reflected in not involving the judge of the Court of First Instance in the judgment rendered by the Court of Appeal. NIHR has considered the relevant complaint and addressed the Supreme Judicial Council to consider the matter. However, no response has been received to date. In addition, the Bahraini legislation does not provide for compensation for the legislative authority mistakes. g. With regard to complaints received on the guarantee that the accused has the right to appropriate treatment and care, NIHR has taken the necessary actions about four complaints in collaboration with the Ministry of Interior. The complainants were given access to treatment and health care. The Supreme Judicial Council was addressed regarding enabling a convict to receive appropriate treatment. However, no response has been received. h. As regards the complaint relating to the application for reconsideration before a higher court, and the other complaint related to challenging a court ruling, NIHR considered that both complaints prejudice the independence of the judiciary, and thus, it has no competence to consider these complaints. 21. NIHR notes that it has received a request by the family of a convict to intervene to consider the provision of appropriate treatment. The family expressed its deep concern for his health. The National Institution contacted the concerned authorities to request a meeting with the convicted person to identify his health condition. The authorities complied with the Institution request in this regard. However, upon visiting the convict in the reform and rehabilitation centre, the convict abstained from meeting the NIHR delegate without stating clear reasons. He requested coordination with his family to follow up on his health condition. 22. Following a visit by NIHR to Drydock Custody Centre on August 17, 2013, the Institution received a call from one of the detainees in which he expressed his surprise towards holding his case pending judgment. He stated that he only attended one trial hearing in which the charges against him were recited and he was never given the chance to meet with his lawyer. His lawyer repeatedly requested the public prosecution to meet him, but in vain. NIHR addressed the Supreme Judicial Council about the issue raised by the prisoner, which, if proven, constitutes a violation of his right to fair litigation proceedings, which consist of enabling him to exercise the right of defense at all stages of investigation and trial, and having the full right to contact a lawyer. However, NIHR has not received a response about this issue to date. RECOMMENDATIONS: In light of the foregoing, the NIHR recommends the following: 1. Making the necessary legislative amendments to ensure the accused person’s right to counsel. This should include misdemeanors as well as felonies, starting from the stage of collecting evidence, until pre-trial investigation, through the trial stage and beyond. 55