A/HRC/37/68/Add.1 has been in contact with decision-making centers in the field of cyberspace, including the Supreme Council of Cyberspace and the Ministry of Communications and Nongovernmental Organizations of the Entrepreneur and the active centers in the field of women and youth, and in implementing the US State Department's projects has played an important role in the plot for overthrowing the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and, in the light of the existing evidence in the records, the appeal filed by the Supreme Court of Appeals and its defense lawyers, and that the ruling issued by the Supreme Court in respect of the proceedings, observance of the procedure and the implementation of the matter, the received was examined and with considering the provisions of Article 434 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the request of appeal was found as being unsubstantiated. Therefore, the appeal court refuses the request in compliance with Article A of Article 455 of the said Law.” Reply to paragraph 56 In the case of Mr. Wang's case, according to the received information on 23aug. 2017, he was detained on charges of espionage and was sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment and the verdict was further confirmed and he is now being held at Evin Prison. Meanwhile, he has met with a representative of the Swiss Embassy who has been in charge of the interests of the United States Government and has access to doctor and lawyer. Reply to paragraph 57 As it was said, the pattern governing the behavior of the Islamic Republic of Iran towards Iranians residing abroad is guaranteeing their rights and those of their relatives as well as a protection for their rights in foreign countries. There are many undocumented allegations in this paragraph that are proven to be incorrect as explained hereunder: On the case of Mr. Sabri Hasanpour, according to the statement of Tehran Province Justice Department of 12 Dec. 2017, "the defendant was charged with A. assembly and collusion for committing crimes against the internal and external security of the country. B. propaganda activities against the Islamic Republic of Iran; C. agitation of public opinion through cyberspace and internet; D. insulting the Late Imam (PBUH). He was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment in relation to clause A, and one year in prison for allegations of clauses B and C; and has been sentenced to two years' imprisonment in respect of paragraph D. His case has recently been re-investigated in the appeal court, as a result of which he was acquitted with the charge of clause A. He is presently serving his prison term in Evin prison. It is worth mentioning that he has been enjoying appropriate medical service and recently he has undergone a surgery. He is regularly meeting with family members in the cabin and in person and has no restrictions on access to the telephone. According to the Tehran Province Court, Mr. Kamal Foroughi Abri, XXXXXXXXX, was charged and sentenced to 7 years imprisonment on charge of espionage in favor of a foreign country, to a three-year prison term on charge of assembly and collusion against security of the country, on the charge of holding alcoholic beverages to 1 year imprisonment and 74 lashes and payment of 1,375,000 Tomans in cash. The verdict was appealed and reviewed by the Branch 36 of the Tehran Court of Appeals and after revision of the case and according to the ruling dated 20 Aug. 2013, the court annulled his 3 years of imprisonment on the charge of assembly collusion against security of the country, and the remaining sentence was upheld in accordance with paragraph (a) of Article 257 of the Code of Judicial Procedure, the Code of Criminal Procedure of the General Courts and the Revolutionary Court in Criminal Matters. He has had more than 15 visits to outpatient clinics and medical forensic for medical services. He has also been examined at the presence of law enforcement agents inside the prison by medical forensic. Unfortunately, he does not cooperate with the health center of Evin prison for treatment and refuses to go to the hospital out of the prison. In addition, he has had telephone call with his wife abroad, and has had nine meetings with his lawyers, XXXXXXXXX and XX XXXXXXXXX more than 9 times. According to the report of 25 Oct. 2016, on the application of Article 134 of the Criminal Code, only seven years of imprisonment and extradition of 114,000 Pounds are considered as his punishment. He has been serving his prison term from 5 May, 2011. Reply to paragraph 58 Unfortunately, in this paragraph, the Draft casts a pre-judgment without reference to a given source, and even falsely raises the allegation that there is a pattern of non-compliance with a fair trial. Firstly, it is necessary to declare the due to the lack of the source of information and 23