49. 法院在判决书中对案件事实的叙述中，将被告、他们所谓的活动及他们据称所属的团体描述为恐怖主义。因此，它将被拘留者及其行为归类为恐怖主义类别，而没有将法律行为与相应的法律规则相联系。4 据称，法院援引了包括在调查报告、资产和没收报告及证人证言中的所有陈述和供词，但无视被告的否认。来文方指出，因此，法院的判决是站不住脚的，因为它基于毫无根据的指控，而且未能提供将法律事实归于相关法律规则的合乎逻辑的法律推理。此外，由于将被告归类为恐怖分子，将他们的活动归类为恐怖主义，无视他们的年龄，5 法院在判决中能够依据的是关于保护社会免遭恐怖主义行为危害的《第 58 号法》(2006 年)，而不是《巴林刑法》，6 前者规定的处罚7 比后者更严厉。
49. In its judgment, the court described the defendants, their alleged activities and the group they supposedly belong to as terrorists in its narration of the facts of the case. It has thus classified the detainees and their actions as falling under the category of terrorism without linking the legal acts to the corresponding legal rules.4 The court reportedly evoked all of the statements and confessions included in the investigation report, the assets and seizures reports and the witness statements, but disregarded the defendants’ denials. The source submits that the judgment issued by the court is therefore flimsy as it is based on unfounded accusations and fails to provide a logical legal reasoning that attributes legal facts to the relevant legal rules. Moreover, because it classified the defendants as terrorists and their activities as terrorism, and despite their age, 5 the court was able to rely on Law No. 58 (2006) on protecting society from terrorist acts in its sentencing, rather than on the Bahraini Penal Code,6 the prescribed penalties being harsher under the former7 than under the latter.