under duress or coercion, it would be considered as invalid. But this does not prevent the court from taking other evidences to prove the accusation. 151. It is argued by the Respondent State that the court judgment against the victims took into consideration all the circumstances related to the facts according to the satisfaction of the court based upon the processes in the case, the investigations, the court sessions and the related hearings of witnesses and the written and verbal pleadings of the defence in order to clarify the facts, the elements of the crime and the provisions of the law applicable thereon. The Respondent State argues that the court considered, scrutinized and analyzed all the evidences of the subject matter of the complaint including the related medical and technical reports and the public prosecution investigations to reach the facts upon which its judgment was established. 152. It is further contended by the Respondent State that the court responded to all the pleas of the defence during the trial including the plea of the invalidity of the confessions, and that the court was satisfied that the confessions of the victims and the other accused persons during the investigation were made by persons who have the will and the discernment and are fully aware of the charges against them. 153. The Respondent State submits that when the accused persons first appeared before the public prosecutor they were free from any injuries. They further submit that the court was certain that the victims were fully aware that the investigations were made by the Public Prosecution Office (PPO) and that the PPO had informed them of the charges against them. The Respondent State also stated that „the Office of the Public Prosecutor in carrying out its investigations, interrogated the accused, Mohamed Gaiz Sabah in four sessions, Osama Abdel Ghani El-Nakhlawi in eight sessions and Mohamed 44