A/HRC/36/31 Lanka, arrived at Mr. Ganeshnantham’s house in Kalmunai, and threatened his relatives. The experts expressed serious concerns at the alleged threats and intimidation which appear to be linked to Mr. Ganeshnantham’s participation in the thirty-fourth session of the Human Rights Council. At the time of the finalization of the present report, no response had been received from the Government. 22. Sudan 75. On 28 July 2016, the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in the Sudan expressed his concerns regarding the interception of four representatives of Sudanese civil society at Khartoum International Airport on their way to Geneva, where they were to participate in pre-session meetings of the universal periodic review on the Sudan (see A/HRC/33/65, para. 28). Sawsan Hassan Elshowaya, Dr. Muawia Shaddad, Faisal Mohamed Salih and Siddig Yousif were stopped and informed of travel bans in place against them. Their passports were confiscated and they were told to report to the Information and Inquiry Section at National Intelligence and Security Service headquarters for further information. 76. On 9 January 2017, special procedure mandate holders expressed concerns with the Government with regard to allegations of reprisals against six human rights defenders, staff members and affiliates of the Centre for Training and Human Development reportedly in part because of their cooperation with the Human Rights Council (see A/HRC/35/44, para. 12, SDN 1/2017). 77. On 22 May 2016, these individuals were arrested by National Intelligence and Security Service agents, with three of them subsequently released on bail. On 15 August 2016, criminal case no. 110/2016 was filed against all of them, who were reportedly charged by the Prosecution Office under the 1991 Penal Code, pertaining to articles 21 (joint acts in execution of criminal conspiracy), 50 (undermining the constitutional system), 51 (waging war against the State), 53 (espionage against the country), and 65 (criminal and terrorist organizations). These charges, if confirmed, could lead to the application of the death penalty. The criminal charges brought against these six human rights defenders, and the ongoing arbitrary detention of three of them, are reportedly in part related to their cooperation with the Human Rights Council. At the time of the finalization of the report, no response had been received from the Government. 23. Tajikistan 78. On 2 June 2016, the Supreme Court of Tajikistan sentenced leaders of the banned Islamic Revival Party of Tajikistan (IRPT) to life imprisonment and eleven other members to jail terms ranging from two to 28 years. The IRPT members were reportedly sentenced based on accusations of participation in a criminal group, incitement of national, racial or religious hatred, murder, terrorism, appeals to violent change of the constitutional order, illegal possession or transfer of weapons, and armed rebellion, but the trial was closed and allegedly did not adhere to international human rights standards. On the same day, and in direct response to the conviction, relatives of the convicted IRPT members intended to seek assistance from the United Nations Office in Tajikistan but were intercepted by law enforcement officials who detained all of the individuals who were attempting to reach the United Nations premises. 79. On 7 June 2016, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression stated in a press release endorsed by multiple mandate holders that he deplored the harsh sentencing of Tajikistan political opposition leaders. He further noted that he had received disturbing reports that relatives of IRPT members were prevented by the police from reaching the United Nations office after the verdict was announced, and had been taken to a district court where they were threatened to be arrested 29