A/HRC/51/47 136. On 13 July the Government responded to the note verbale sent in connection to the present report and noted that it had responded to previous reports and appeals clarifying the facts relating to the cases included. It also noted that it had refuted the claims and allegations contained therein, and demonstrated that the principle of legality was observed and that all legal procedures were followed. The Government indicated that those responses should be taken into account. It underlined that the judiciary enjoys complete independence in the exercise of its functions, meaning that it operates impartially and without external influence. 137. Regarding the situation of Ms. Al-Hathloul, the Government informed that she was convicted for committing terrorism offences punishable under the Countering Terrorism and the Financing of Terrorism Act. She was sentenced to a term of 5 years and 8 months imprisonment calculated from the date of arrest, of which 2 years and 10 months were suspended, and she was handed a travel ban of similar length that went into effect after the end of the prison sentence. She is currently at liberty. Concerning Ms. Badawi, the Government informed that she was convicted for committing offences that are punishable under the Countering Cybercrime Act. She was sentenced to a term of five years imprisonment calculated from the date of arrest, of which two years were suspended, and she was handed a travel ban of similar length that went into effect after the end of the prison sentence. She is currently at liberty. 138. Regarding Mr. al-Harbi, the Government informed that he was convicted of committing several offences with a view to undermining public order, as well as committing offences punishable under the Countering Cybercrime Act. He was sentenced to a term of 10 years imprisonment and handed a travel ban of similar length that went into effect after the end of the prison sentence. Concerning Mr. Nakhifi, the Government informed that he was convicted of committing several offences that undermine national security, as well as committing offences punishable under the Countering Cybercrime Act. He was sentenced to a term of 6 years imprisonment and handed a travel ban of similar length that went into effect after the end of the prison sentence. 139. The Government stated that the individuals above were not tortured or subjected to ill-treatment. During her trial, Ms. Al-Hathloul alleged that she had been tortured. After examining the case documents, the court dismissed the allegations because it was not proven that she had been tortured during her detention. Ms. Al-Hathloul challenged the judgement and filed an appeal. The Court of Appeal reviewed the case and upheld the judgement regarding the claim of torture. 140. The Government informed the individuals above were not victims of enforced disappearance, they were held in designated and known detention facilities, enjoyed visitation rights and were able to communicate periodically and on an ongoing basis. They were tried for punishable offences, not for communicating with various United Nations human rights mechanisms. The Government noted that the laws of country guarantee the right of freedom of opinion and expression unless the exercise of that right results in a breach of the law or exceeds the bounds applicable to society and its members or its precepts. 141. The Government informed that the travel bans imposed on these individuals were handed down pursuant to judicial orders. The concerned individuals were able to challenge those orders before the Court of Appeal and the Court upheld the orders. The Government stated that the Human Rights Commission followed up on the cases above and found that the actions taken against them were sound. It verified that the applicable human rights laws and regulations were observed. In addition, the Commission did not find any indication that any of their rights had been violated. 24. Sri Lanka 142. The case of Ms. Sandya Ekneligoda was included in the 2019 report of the SecretaryGeneral183 on allegations of harassment, including online attacks, in reprisal for her efforts to seek the truth about the fate and whereabouts of her husband, disappeared journalist Mr. Prageeth Ekneligoda, including her engagement with the United Nations Working Group on 183 66 A/HRC/42/30, para. 75, Annex I, para. 97.