If somebody wants to try to guess what the arguments of the UN Working Group can be, the starting point should be: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/

If somebody wants to try to guess what the arguments of the UN Working Group can be, the starting point should be: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet26en.pdf http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet26en.pd... "according to the Group, deprivation of liberty is arbitrary if a case falls into one of the following three categories: A) When it is clearly impossible to invoke any legal basis justifying the deprivation of liberty (as when a person is kept in detention after the completion of his sentence or despite an amnesty law applicable to him)(Category I); B) When the deprivation of liberty results from the exercise of the rights or freedoms guaranteed by articles 7, 13, 14, 18, 19, 10 and 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and, insofar as States parties are concerned, by articles 12, 18, 19, 21, 22, 25, 26 and 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Category II); C) When the total or partial non-observance of the international norms relating to the right to a fair trial, spelled out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in the relevant international instruments accepted by the States concerned, is of such gravity as to give the deprivation of liberty an arbitrary character (Category III)." It's about the "arbitrary deprivation of liberty" against his human rights.