WorldCourts: International Case Law Database   International Case Law Database
50,000+ decisions · 50+ institutions
 
     
 
   

26 July 1978

 

Communication No. 22/1977

 
     

human rights committee

  Fourth Session  
  10 July – 2 August 1978  
     
     

o. e.

 

v.

s.

     
     
 

views

 
     
 
 
 
     
     
 
BEFORE: CHAIRMAN: Mr. Andreas v. Mavrommatis (Cyprus)
VICE-CHHAIRMEN: Mr. Luben G. Koulishev (Bulgaria), Mr. Rajsoomer Lallah (Mauritius), Mr. Torkel Opsahl (Norway)
RAPPORTEUR: Mr. Diego Uribe Vargas (Colombia).
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. Julio Prado Vallejo (Ecuador), Mr. Fulgence Seminega (Rwanda), Mr. Walter Surma Tarnopolsky (Canada), Mr. Christian Tomuschat (Federal Republic of Germany).
   
PermaLink: http://www.worldcourts.com/hrc/eng/decisions/1978.07.26_OE_v_S.htm
   
Citation: O.E. v. S. Comm. 22/1977, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/OP/1, at 6 (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 6, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/OP/1, U.N. Sales No. E.84.XIV.2 (1985)
 
     
 
 
     
 

Interim measures, request to State party that alleged victim not be expelled--Request to author for information on submission of same matter to IA CHR

 

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

 

The Human Rights Committee decides:

 

1.         That the State party be informed that the Committee has taken note, with appreciation of the information provided by the State party pursuant to paragraph (b) of the Committee's decision of 25 January 1978 and that, pending further consideration of the case, the Committee is still of the view, expressed in paragraph (c) of that decision, that the alleged victim, having sought refuge in S, should not be handed over or expelled to country X.

 

2.         That the author of the communication be reminded of the Committee's request for further information pursuant to paragraph (d) of its decision of 25 January 1978, in particular on any steps taken to exhaust domestic remedies, taking into account the note from the State party dated 14 April 1978;

 

3.         That the author be informed that unless he furnishes the requested information within six weeks of the date of the reminder, the Committee may conclude that he no longer wishes the Committee to continue consideration of the communication;

 

4.         That the attention of the author be drawn to the observation of the State party that the matter referred to in his communication has been investigated under the procedure established by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights ...;

 

5.         That the author be informed 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 has been submitted to the Inter-American 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 [the] case before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the communication submitted under the Optional Protocol concern the same matter;

 

6.         That it should be explained to the author that this is not a decision on the admissibility of his communication;

 

7.         That the Secretary-General transmit any reply received from the author to the State party as soon as possible to enable the State party to comment thereon if it so wishes, within four weeks of the date of the transmittal;

 

8.         That the text of this decision be communicated to the State party and the author.

 
     

 

 






Home | Terms & Conditions | About

Copyright © 1999- WorldCourts. All rights reserved.