A/HRC/22/26 favour of the accused, even if this led to a lengthier or more complex case for the court to address. It was improper for counsel to be accused of terrorism or fostering terrorism solely for taking the most active defence stance possible on behalf of a suspect, or for expressing criticism of inappropriate conduct by the State or its law enforcement authorities. Without respect for counsel’s role, a credible trial process was difficult to conceive. It was noted that effective recognition of this principle required corresponding levels of appropriate remuneration, if necessary through the legal aid services of the State. 43. Some States have circumvented additional guarantees, such as judicial review of pretrial detention afforded to persons charged with a crime, by redefining the nature of detention as “administrative” on the grounds of a perceived future threat by the individual to national security, including in situations where the individual has been acquitted in a criminal trial. Participants acknowledged the ready potential for abuse in systems of preventative and administrative detention, and the ease with which such bases for detention can be extended to broader categories. While there may be extreme cases where these forms of detention can be appropriate in very specific circumstances, they need to be clearly defined in law and subject to judicial review as well as periodic independent review to ensure that they are ceased in respect of any individual as soon as no longer strictly necessary. Experience has shown that widespread use of this form of detention can lead to distrust and loss of confidence in the law enforcement and security forces. Greater efforts are needed to limit the use of preventive/administrative detention only to highly exceptional and tightly regulated situations. Participants also highlighted that the right to a fair trial presupposes a right to a speedy trial if the individual concerned is suspected of a terrorist crime recognized under international human rights law. Delays in the trial process could undermine additional guarantees under article 9 (3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights afforded to detained persons and increase the risk of potentially indefinite detention in violation of international human rights law. Risk of “exceptional measures” 44. The risk of “exceptional measures” becoming normalized was addressed as an overarching concern. This includes the adoption of exceptional counter-terrorism legislation which then becomes permanent, especially where this is not a stand-alone piece of legislation and instead amends existing criminal laws and procedures intended to operate in “normal” situations, or the use of special courts to try terrorist and other criminal cases in circumstances which may not warrant such use. Counter-terrorism measures introduced in moments of crisis or extreme political stress, and which are intended as short-term measures, can readily become entrenched with the passage of time and resorted to routinely by law enforcement authorities. There were also examples where far-reaching counterterrorism tools, designed to address a particular deficit in the counter-terrorism context, became applied to other areas or used as generalized law enforcement powers. 45. It was suggested that regular review of the human rights compliance of counter terror laws and practices is therefore crucial. As far as possible, counter-terrorism law and practice should be consistent with the principle of normalcy. If any special measures are adopted, they should also be subject to periodic review to ensure compliance with human rights and avoid their entrenchment. Discussants stressed the importance of review mechanisms in order to ensure that both the provisions and actual implementation of counter-terrorism laws are specific, necessary, effective and proportionate. 17 17 14 See Report of the Special Rapporteur (A/HRC/16/51) (see note 4 above), para. 20: “Regular review and the use of sunset clauses are best practices helping to ensure that special powers relating to the countering of terrorism are effective and continue to be required, and to help avoid the