26 January 1978

 

Communication No. 4/1977; U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/10/D/4/1977

 
     

human rights committee

  Third Session  
  16 January 3 February 1978  
     
     

William Torres Ramirez

 

v.

Uruguay

     
     
 

VIEWS

 
     
  Return Home
 
 
     
     
 
BEFORE: CHAIRMAN: Mr. Andreas v. Mavrommatis (Cyprus)
VICE-CHAIRMEN: Mr. Luben G. Koulishev (Bulgaria), Mr. Rajsoomer Lallah (Mauritius), Mr. Torkel Opsahl (Norway)
ACTING RAPPORTEUR: Mr. Julio Prado Vallejo (Ecuador)
MEMBERS: Mr. Mohamed Ben-Fadhel (Tunisia), Mr. Ole Mogens Espersen (Denmark), Sir Vincent Evans (United Kingdom), Mr. Manouchehr Ganji (Iran), Mr. Bernhard Graefrath (German Democratic Republic), Mr. Vladimir Hanga (Romania), Mr. Haissam Kelani (Syrian Arab Republic), Mr. Fernando Mora Rojas (Costa Rica), Mr. Anatoly Petrovich Movchan (Soviet Union), Mr. Fulgence Seminega (Rwanda), Mr. Walter Surma Tarnopolsky (Canada), Mr. Christian Tomuschat (Federal Republic of Germany).

Mr. Diego Uribe Vargas (Colombia) was unable to attend the third session.
   
PermaLink: http://www.worldcourts.com/hrc/eng/decisions/1978.01.26_Torres_Ramirez_v_Uruguay.htm
   
Citation: Torres Ramirez v. Uruguay, Comm. 4/1977, U.N. CCPR/C/OP/1, at 4 (HRC 1978)
Publications: Office of the U.N. High Comm'r for Human Rights, Human Rights Committee: Selected Decisions under the Optional Protocol, Vol. I, at 4, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/OP/1, U.N. Sales No. E.84.XIV.2 (1985)
 
     
 
 
     
 

Request to author for information on submission of same matter to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR)--Request to State party on remedies available to alleged victim

 

Article of Optional Protocol: 5 (2) (a) and (b)

 

The Human Rights Committee decides:

 

(a)        That the author be informed

 

(i)        That the Committee understands that a case concerning him (Case No. 2109, October 1976) has been submitted to and declared admissible by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights under the special procedure governed by articles 53 to 57 of its Regulations,

(ii)       That the Committee is precluded by article 5 (2) (a) of the Optional Protocol from considering a communication if the same matter is being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement. If the author maintains that the matter which he has submitted to the Human Rights Committee is not the same matter which is under consideration by the InterAmerican Commission on Human Rights, he should inform the Committee of his grounds for so maintaining and furnish the Committee with any other information in his possession relating to the submission of the case to and its examination by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. In the absence of any further information pertinent to this question, the Committee may have to conclude that case No. 2109 before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the communication submitted under the Optional Protocol concern the same matter.

 

(b)       That the State party be informed that, in the absence of more specific information concerning the domestic remedies said to be available to the author, and the effectiveness of those remedies as enforced by the competent authorities in Uruguay, the Committee is unable to accept that he has failed to exhaust such remedies. The communication will therefore not be considered inadmissible in so far as exhaustion of domestic remedies is concerned, unless the State party gives details of the remedies which it submits have been available to the author in the circumstances of his case, together with evidence that there would be a reasonable prospect that such remedies would be effective;

 

(c)        That the State party and the author be informed that any additional information which they may wish to submit in this connection should reach the Human Rights Committee, in care of the Division of Human Rights, United Nations Office at Geneva, within six weeks of the date of the present communication addressed to them;

 

(d)       That the Secretary-General transmit any information or observations received to the other party as soon as possible to enable the other party to comment thereon if it so wishes. Any such comments should reach the Human Rights Committee, in care of the Division of Human Rights, United Nations Office at Geneva, within four weeks of the date of the transmittal;

 

(e)        That the text of this decision be communicated to the State party and the author.

 
     

 

 

home | terms & conditions | copyright | about

 

Copyright 1999-2011 WorldCourts. All rights reserved.