7 November 1991

 

Communication No. 457/1991; U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/43/D/457/1991

 
     

human rights committee

  Fourty-Third Session  
  21 October 8 November 1991  
     
     

A. I. E.

 

v.

Libyan Arab Jamahiriya

     
     
 

DECISION

 
     
  Return Home
 
 
     
     
 
BEFORE: CHAIRMAN: Mr. Fausto Pocar (Italy)
VICE-CHAIRMEN: Mr. Francisco Jose Aguilar Urbina (Costa Rica), Mr. Vojin Dimitrijevic (Yugoslavia), Mr. S. Amos Wako (Kenya)
RAPPORTEUR: Mr. Nisuke Ando (Japan)
MEMBERS: Miss Christine Chanet (France), Mr. Omran El Shafei (Egypt), Mr. Janos Fodor (Hungary), Mr. Kurt Herndl (Austria), Mrs. Rosalyn Higgins (United Kingdom), Mr. Rajsoomer Lallah (Mauritius), Mr. Andreas V. Mavrommatis (Cyprus), Mr. Rein A. Myullerson (Soviet Union), Mr. Birame Ndiaye (Senegal), Mr. Julio Prado Vallejo (Ecuador), Mr. Waleed Sadi (Jordan), Mr. Alejandro Serrano Caldera (Nicaragua), Mr. Bertill Wennergren (Sweden)


All the members attended the forty-third session of the Committee except Mr. Ndiaye, Mr. Serrano Caldera and Mr. Wako. Mrs. Higgins and Mr. Mavrommatis attended only part of that session.

   
PermaLink: http://www.worldcourts.com/hrc/eng/decisions/1991.11.07_AIE_v_Libya.htm
   
Citation: A. I. E. v. Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Comm. 457/1991, U.N. Doc. A/47/40, at 430 (HRC 1991)
Publications: Report of the Human Rights Committee, U.N. GAOR, 47th Sess., Supp. No. 40, U.N. Doc. A/47/40, Annex X, sect. AA, at 430 (Oct. 9, 1992)
 
     
 
 
     
 

1.         The author of the communication is Abdelaziz Ibrahim Elwezah, an Egyptian citizen born in 1949 in Menofia, Egypt, currently residing in Marseille, France. He claims to be a victim of violations by the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya of his rights under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, without, however, specifying which provisions of the Covenant he considers to have been violated. The Optional Protocol entered into force for the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya on 16 August 1989.

 

THE FACTS AS SUBMITTED BY THE AUTHOR:

 

2.1       On 17 Apri11989, the author was arrested and detained by the Libyan authorities, on suspicion of having collaborated with the French and Egyptian secret services. He was tried before a military court and imprisoned. During captivity he claims to have been tortured and ill-treated. On 15 June 1989, he was brought to the airport and made to board a plane bound for Orly, France. He is currently under constant medical care, which is said to have become necessary because the trauma suffered by the torture inflicted on him in Libya. The French "Commission Technique d'orientation et de Reclassement Professionnel" (COTOREP) and several medical certificates confirm that the author has become incapacited, and that he suffers from "affective disorder". His disability is evaluated at 80%.

 

2.2       The author states that he is in no position to exhaust Libyan remedies given that, upon his release from prison, he was directly brought to the airport and expelled to France, and therefore had no opportunity to avail himself of any Libyan remedies. In France, he adds, he is unable to resort to such remedies.

 

THE COMPLAINT:

 

3.         Although the author does not invoke any of the provisions of the Covenant, it transpires from his submissions that he claims to be a victim of a violation of articles 7, 9 and 10 of the Covenant. In particular, he claims that his arrest was arbitrary, as there was no support for the charges against him, and that he was tortured and ill-treated between 17 April and 15 June 1989.

                                             

THE ISSUES AND PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE:

 

4.1       Before considering any claims contained in a communication, the Human Rights Committee must decide, in accordance with rule 87 of its rules of procedure, whether or not it is admissible under the Optional Protocol to the Covenant.

 

4.2       With regard to the application of the Optional Protocol to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, the Committee recalls that it entered into force on 16 August 1989. It observes that the Optional Protocol cannot be applied retroactively and concludes that the Committee is precluded ratione temporis from examining acts said to have occurred between 17 April and 15 June 1989, unless these acts continued or had effects after the entry into force of the Optional Protocol, constituting in themselves a violation of the Covenant.

 

4.3       Accordingly, the Committee finds that it is precluded ratione temporis from examining the author's allegations.

 

5.         The Human Rights Committee therefore decides:

 

(a)        That the communication is inadmissible;

 

(b)       That this decision shall be communicated to the author and, for information, to the State party.  

 
     

 

 

 

   

home | terms & conditions | copyright | about

 

Copyright 1999-2011 WorldCourts. All rights reserved.