56. Mahloof 先生获得了充足的机会和时间来就针对他提起的两起案件准备答辩。从接到有关第一起案件指控的通知到随后于 2016 年 2 月 23 日举行的听证会之间，Mahloof 先生有 11 天的时间；从接到有关第二起案件指控的通知到随后于 2016 年 5 月 3 日举行的听证会之间，他有 7 天的时间。可以认为，上述时间足够准备答辩，未必与国际标准不符，尤其是未必与《公约》第十四条第三款(乙)项不符。没有任何国际预定时限可充当参考标准，用以评估是否曾给予法律团队以充足的时间来准备答辩。一般来说，时间是否充足取决于诉讼的性质以及案件独有的特征，包括案件的复杂程度。再者说，Mahloof 先生有能力寻求就法庭的裁决提出异议，并且已经利用了这一机会。
56. Mr. Mahloof was given ample opportunity and time to prepare for his defence in relation to the two cases against him. He had 11 days between being informed of the charge in the first case and the subsequent trial hearing on 23 February 2016, and 7 days between being informed of the charge in the second case and the subsequent trial hearing on 3 May 2016. Those periods could be considered sufficient for the preparation of a defence and not necessarily inconsistent with international standards, particularly with article 14 (3) (b) of the Covenant. There is no internationally predetermined time frame that could serve as a reference to assess whether the legal team was granted adequate time to prepare its case. It generally depends on the nature of the proceedings and on the particular characteristics of the case, including its complexity. Moreover, Mr. Mahloof had the ability to seek to challenge the rulings of the court and has already availed himself of that opportunity.