81. 马尔代夫政府提出，贯穿两项诉讼始终，Mahloof 先生得以拥有自己选择的法律代理，且其律师自两起案件的调查初始阶段即不间断地获得情况通报。但是，工作组指出，获得诉讼情况通报和获得充足时间准备答辩之间，存在着重大的区别。辩护团队提前一天接到准备结案陈词的通知，且被禁止出席 2016 年 7月 25 日举行的最后一场听证会。国际法虽未就多长时间构成准备答辩的“充足”时间规定任何固定期限，但工作组指出，这一问题通常取决于诉讼的性质以及案件的具体特点，包括其复杂程度。
81. The Government argues that throughout both proceedings Mr. Mahloof had the benefit of legal representation of his own choice and that his lawyers were kept continually informed from the initial stages of the investigations of both cases. The Working Group, however, notes that there is a significant difference between being informed of the proceedings and being afforded sufficient time to prepare a defence. The defence team was given one day’s notice to prepare the concluding statements and were barred from the final hearing on 25 July 2016. While there is no set time period prescribed by international law as to what constitutes “adequate” time to prepare a defence, the Working Group also notes that this generally depends on the nature of the proceedings and on the particular characteristics of the case, including its complexity.