A/HRC/28/51 66. A trial session scheduled for August 2014 was postponed due to the fighting in Tripoli, and the trial resumed in October, although Saif al-Islam Qadhafi was not connected by video-link and has not participated in trial sessions since. 67. While all the defendants were eventually represented by defence counsel during the trial sessions (either retained by their families or appointed by the court), the defence counsel for Messrs. al-Senussi and Qadhafi have changed several times and Mr. Qadhafi is no longer represented by a lawyer. Defence counsels reported difficulties in having full and timely access to case material and in meeting their clients in private. 68. UNSMIL/OHCHR is concerned that the trial risks falling short of basic international standards as reflected in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The prosecution presented its case in June 2014, in less than one hour, without calling any witnesses. At the time of writing, the court was asking defence counsel to present their case and was reportedly trying to curtail the number of witnesses per defendant to two or three. UNSMIL/OHCHR has repeatedly stressed that the trial should take place in compliance with international human rights standards, including in relation to the importance of proper legal representation for all defendants and for unfettered access by defence counsel to case files and their clients in confidence. If the trial continues to proceed in this way, it will not meet international standards. It will also constitute a missed historical opportunity to publicly disclose and scrutinize crimes committed under the former regime. 5. Proceedings before the International Criminal Court 69. Following the Security Council’s referral of the situation in Libya to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court in 2011, the Court issued arrest warrants and requested the transfer of Abdullah al-Senussi and Saif al-Islam Qadhafi to The Hague. The Libyan authorities challenged the admissibility of the cases. On 21 May 2014, the Appeals Chamber confirmed that the case of Mr. Qadhafi was admissible before the Court, in part because it found that he was not in State custody. In contrast, in July 2014, the Appeals Chamber decided that Abdullah al-Senussi’s case was inadmissible before the Court as it was subject to ongoing domestic proceedings and that Libya was willing and able to carry out such investigation; also he was considered to be in State custody. On 10 December, the Pre-Trial Chamber found that Libya had failed to surrender Mr. Qadhafi to the Court, and referred the matter to the United Nations Security Council. 70. To date, both Saif al-Islam Qadhafi and Abdullah al-Senussi have been unable to access legal counsel representing them before the International Criminal Court. In her briefing to the Security Council on 12 November 2014, the Prosecutor noted that the “ongoing violence and alleged threats to judges, prosecutors and lawyers do not augur well for a fair trial”. She further noted that she would assess options, “including whether to apply for a review of the judge’s decision upholding Libya’s request that the case against Mr. Al-Senussi be tried in Libya”. 71. On 25 July 2014, the Prosecutor issued a statement that she “[would] not hesitate to investigate and prosecute those who commit crimes under the Court’s jurisdiction in Libya, irrespective of their official status or affiliation.” 6. Law on Political and Administrative Isolation 72. The authorities have undertaken limited or no vetting of new members of the armed forces, law enforcement, judiciary or Judicial Police. In contrast, extensive measures targeting those affiliated with the Qadhafi regime have been applied. Law No. 13 of 2013 on Political and Administrative Isolation lists a wide range of political, administrative and other positions under the Qadhafi regime, as well as types of affiliation and conduct, as a basis for excluding individuals from public life for 10 years. It contains criteria which are 14