11- The NIHR perceived the importance of amending the provisions of the law by decree Number (3)
for 1982 concerning the Public Security Forces Law to be included (Court of Cassation) within the
formation of military courts to which are subject those addressed by its provisions, given that there
is no justification for differentiating between the military personnel and the other civilian employees
insofar as enjoying the guarantee of the presence of a Court of Cassation that monitors the sound
application of the law, and the amendment is consistent with the law by decree Number (34) for the
year 2002 by issuing the Military Penal law amended by virtue of a law by decree Number (46) for
the year 2010, which created the Court of Cassation to be included within the formation of military
courts to which are subject the members of the Bahraini defense forces.
Sixth: Proposal to amend some of the provisions of the law by decree Number (46)
for the year 2002 by issuing the Criminal Procedures Law, such concerning the
period of precautionary imprisonment, grievance, and the period for commencing
investigation
1- The NIHR submitted a proposal to amend some of the provisions of the law by decree Number
(46) for the year 2002 by issuing the Law of Criminal Procedures, such concerning the appeal of the
period of precautionary detention and grievance, and the period prior to start of investigation, where
the NIHR explained in its consultative opinion that while Article Number (2) of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which the Kingdom of Bahrain acceded pursuant
to Law Number (56) for the year 2006, stipulated: “3. Each State Party to the present Covenant
undertakes: (a) To ensure that any person whose rights or freedoms as herein recognized are
violated shall have an effective remedy,”
اﻟﺘﻘﺮﻳﺮ اﻟﺴﻨﻮي اﻟﺜﺎﻟﺚ
ﻟﻠﻤﺆﺳﺴﺔ اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴﺔ ﻟﺤﻘﻮق اﻧﺴﻨﺎم
ـ ﻣﻤﻠﻜﺔ اﻟﺒﺤﺮﻳﻦ2015 ﻟﻌﺎم
2- Moreover, Article Number (9)-Paragraph (4) of the above convention referred to the right to
grievance regarding the decision of precautionary detention represented in a reconsideration of
detention, where it stated: “Anyone who is deprived of his liberty by arrest or detention shall be
entitled to take proceedings before a court, in order that that court may decide without delay on
the lawfulness of his detention and order his release if the detention is not lawful.”
3- Whereas the totality of the principles related to the protection of all persons exposed to any form
or detention or imprisonment, issued by virtue of the UN General Assembly resolution 35/177 of
15 December 1980, affirmed Principle Number (32) thereof: “1. A detained person or his counsel
shall be entitled at any time to take proceedings according to domestic law before a judicial or
other authority to challenge the lawfulness of his detention in order to obtain his release without
delay, if it is unlawful.”
4- This was followed by the contents of Principle Number (37): “A person detained on a criminal
charge shall be brought before a judicial or other authority provided by law promptly after his
arrest. Such authority shall decide without delay upon the lawfulness and necessity of detention.
”, and in the same context Principle Number (38) emphasized: “A person detained on a criminal
charge shall be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial.”
57