UN Human Rights Committee

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Human Rights Committee
Human Rights Committee
 
Organization type Committee
Abbreviation CCPR
management EgyptEgypt Ahmed Amin Fathalla
Founded March 28, 1976
Headquarters Geneva , SwitzerlandSwitzerlandSwitzerland 
Upper organization Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)
 

The United Nations Human Rights Committee (Engl. Human Rights Committee , CCPR), also known as the Committee on Civil and Political Rights (Engl. Committee on Civil and Political Rights , CCPR) is one of the United Nations employed supervisory body which the implementation and compliance International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (IPbpR, UN Civil Pact) and its two additional protocols monitored by the contracting states. If he discovers deficiencies during the inspection, he can submit proposals and recommendations to the states on how they can improve the implementation of the treaty (Art. 62 para. 3 UN Charter). The CCPR is composed of 18 experts and meets three times a year in Geneva.

A likelihood of confusion exists with the UN Human Rights Council (Engl. Human Rights Council , HRC), which earlier UN Human Rights Commission replaced, as they had lost credibility. It can be especially confused when - as for example the. Foreign Office of Germany does - for both institutions the same acronym is used: Human Rights (Human Rights Council - HRC ) and Committee on Human Rights (Human Rights Committee - HRC ).

tasks and activities

The creation of the committee and its tasks are contained in Part VI IPbpR. Its competence relate exclusively to states that have ratified the corresponding agreements (Art. 48 IPbpR), it also depends on which declarations and reservations the states made when the treaty was concluded. So did u. a. Pakistan because of Sharia reservations to Articles 3, 6, 7, 12, 13, 18, 19 and 40 IPbpR, which were withdrawn after violent protests by the Western states.

The CCPR is responsible for compliance with the following agreements:

Its tasks in this regard relate to:

  • State reports, according to Art. 40 IPbpR, Art. 3 IPbpR 2nd FP
  • State complaints, according to Art. 41 IPbpR, Art. 4 IPbpR 2nd FP
  • Individual complaints, according to Art. 2 IPbpR 1st FP, Art. 5 IPbpR 2nd FP

Contractual basis

The civil pact is a human rights agreement created by the UN , which was adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 16, 1966 together with the first optional protocol on individual complaints and the social pact (resolution 2200A (XXI)) and entered into force under international law on March 23, 1976 . It contains the basic human rights and some of its provisions were defined as absolute rights , so-called mandatory international law, from which a state may not deviate even in an emergency (Art. 4 IPbpR).

In order to reach a consensus so that as many states as possible join the agreement, the disputed points were excluded and regulated in the two additional protocols.

The first optional protocol (IPbpR 1. FP), which was adopted together with the civil pact, contains the right to file an individual complaint with the CCPR in the event of breaches of contract by a state. It also came into effect under international law on March 23, 1976 (Art. 9 IPbpR 1st FP).

In the second optional protocol (IPbpR 2nd FP), the states have contractually committed to the abolition of the death penalty. It contains a state and individual complaint procedure and a state reporting procedure (Art. 3 ff IPbpR 2nd FP). It was passed on December 15, 1989 by the UN General Assembly and came into force on July 11, 1991 (Art. 8 Para. 1 IPbpR 2nd FP).

Ratifications

The state complaint had to be expressly rejected at the time of ratification, the approval of the individual complaint took place with the ratification of the IPbpR 1st FP.

German-speaking countries in force GermanyGermany Germany LiechtensteinLiechtenstein Liechtenstein AustriaAustria Austria SwitzerlandSwitzerland Switzerland
Civil Pact IPbpR 03/23/1976 December 17, 1973 12/10/1998 09/10/1978 06/18/1992
1. FP individual complaint 03/23/1976 08/25/1993 12/10/1998 12/10/1987 ----
2. FP Abolition of the death penalty 07/11/1991 08/18/1992 12/10/1998 03/02/1993 06/16/1994
Reservations, declarations, etc.
to the civil pact no Explanations Explanations Explanations
to state complaints Yes Yes Yes with reservation
to individual complaints with reservation Yes with reservation ----

Germany made a same matter reservation on the individual complaint ( the Committee shall not apply to communications which have already been considered ). Austria also made a same matter reservation ( that the same matter has not been examined by the European Commission on Human Rights ), since the Commission has since been repealed, this reservation is ineffective. The Switzerland agreed to the State application for only five years and after that period it is irregularly extended for five years.

Rules of Procedure of the CCPR

In order to carry out its tasks defined in Part IV IPbpR, the committee drew up rules of procedure , in which the organization, procedures and responsibilities of the committee were regulated (Art. 39 (2) IPbpR). It consists of 2 parts, Part I. General Provisions and Part II. Provisions relating to the tasks of the Committee . It is further subdivided into 19 chapters and contains 114 rules (version CCPR /C/3/Rev.11 of January 9, 2019). The rules are numbered consecutively and when the Rules of Procedure are revised they are renumbered.

In the revision on February 21, 2011, chap. 16 and 19 introduced a follow-up procedure to review the implementation of the recommendations of the committee, as some states ignored its recommendations.

The relevant chapters of the Rules of Procedure are:

  • Cape. 15. Procedure for the examination of the state reports according to Article 40 IPbpR
  • Cape. 17. Examination of state complaints according to Article 41 IPbpR
  • Cape. 18. Receipt and examination of individual complaints according to FP 1

Examination of the state reports

The states undertook to implement the agreement domestically (Part II IPbpR), to do this they undertook to submit reports to the committee in which they must explain how they implement the treaty (Art. 40 IPbpR, rule 66 Rules of Procedure). The test procedure is described in chap. 15 of the Rules of Procedure, the committee issued a guideline on the content and form of the reports to be submitted by the states.

The states have an initial report within one year after conclusion of the Committee (English. Initial report ) to submit, after approximately every four years a periodic state report (Engl. Periodical reports ). Because of the overloading of the committees, the UN General Assembly introduced the simplified reporting procedure .

If no significant deficiencies were found during the last review of a state report, the committee can now carry out the simplified procedure in which it sends the contracting states a list of issues prior to reporting (LOIPR), the answers to which it receives. Replies to LOIs ) are then considered periodic state reports (Rule 73 Rules of Procedure ).

At the state reporting procedure also can non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and national human rights organizations (NHRIs) actively participate and submit parallel reports to the state reports, show a lack of implementation of the ICCPR by States Parties. In doing so, gaps or errors in the state report can be clarified and deficits pointed out.

The review of the report takes place in public meetings in which the committee examines whether the contracting state has correctly implemented the civil pact and how it can remedy existing deficiencies (Rule 72 et seq. Of the Rules of Procedure). For the participation of third parties at the public hearing admission is required (Engl. Accreditation ).

If a state does not submit a report despite a warning, the committee checks the implementation of the civil pact on the basis of the parallel reports submitted by the NGOs and NHRIs and notes this in its annual report to the UN General Assembly (Rule 70 f of the Rules of Procedure ).

If, during the review of the report, the committee finds that the state has implemented the civil pact inadequately, it can submit proposals to remedy the deficiencies (Art. 40 para. 4 IPbpR, Rule 74 Rules of Procedure). These proposals are as Concluding Observations (Engl. Concluding Observations ), respectively.

These proposals of the CCPR are not legally binding, the implementation cannot be forced and only a follow-up procedure is provided in which a reporter checks the implementation by the state (Rule 75 Rules of Procedure). If necessary, the same proposals will be made in the next state report. There are no sanctions against the state concerned.

As some countries fail to submit their reports or are late in submitting their reports, the UNHCHR compiled a list of the countries that submit their reports on time (e.g. Italy, Switzerland, etc.) and a list of those who are in default (e.g. Germany, Lichtenstein, Austria, the Vatican etc.).

State complaints

This procedure is regulated in Chapter 17 of the Rules of Procedure. The committee is empowered to examine state complaints if a state party claims that another state party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Civil Pact (IPbpR) or the second optional protocol. The prerequisite for this is that both states explicitly recognized the competence of the committee when ratifying the treaty (Art. 41 IPbpR, rule 82 VerO). The requirement of express consent to the state complaint procedure was not included in the draft contract, but a mandatory part of the contract. Since some states objected to this, the draft was amended so that the states must expressly consent to this complaint procedure.

In contrast to individual complaints, there are no high formal requirements for state complaints and the UNHCHR Secretariat is not authorized to declare state complaints inadmissible, as is the case with individual complaints.

The committee can set up an ad hoc conciliation commission that tries to settle the dispute (Art. 42 IPbpR). If no amicable agreement can be reached, it summarizes the essential facts and the statements of the two states (Art. 42 para. 7 lit c IPbpR). Which completes the process.

Subsequent referral to the International Court of Justice is not provided for in the civil pact. It should be noted, however, that the contracting states may also use other procedures for the settlement of disputes (Art. 44 IPbpR), such as the ECHR , since the IPbpR and the ECHR are largely identical.

There are rules for international disputes, including: a. The Agreement for the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes States do not necessarily have to turn to the International Court of Justice; there is also a European Agreement for the peaceful settlement of disputes .

On December 16, 1971, Ireland submitted a state complaint against England to the ECMR for violating the prohibition of torture in accordance with Art. 3 ECHR. Formally there would also have been the possibility of submitting a state complaint to the committee for a violation of the prohibition of torture according to Art. 7 IPbpR - only the IPBPR only came into force afterwards.

Note on this judgment of the ECHR and the consequences (Guantanamo, Abu Graib)

In its torture memos on the methods of torture in Guantanamo, etc., the USA relied on this judgment of the ECHR, as the USA had a reservation on inhuman and degrading treatment according to Art. Art. 7 IPbpR and Art. 16 FoK. From the judgment of the ECHR, the USA concluded that these torture methods ( five techniques of interrogation ) used by England were permissible under American law, since it is not torture, but according to the ECHR only inhuman and degrading treatment, thus allowed under American law. On December 4, 2014, Ireland requested the ECHR to revise the judgment that it was torture and not just inhuman and degrading treatment, the appeal was rejected by the ECHR.

Obvious oversight by the UN

This is the condition for a state complaint, according to which all domestic legal remedies available in the matter must be lodged and exhausted, unless the procedure for applying the legal remedies takes unreasonably long (Art. 41 (1) lit c IPbpR) an obvious oversight by the UN, since the complaining state only has to inform the other state of the grievances in writing and if the matter has not been settled within six months, it can contact the committee directly (Art. 41 para. 1 lit a, b IPbpR).

Individual complaints

The individual complaints are euphemistically referred to as messages ( individual communications versus state-to-state complaints ). If a state ratified the first optional protocol (IPbpR 1. FP), the committee can also examine individual complaints against this contracting state (Art. 2 IPbpR 1. FP).

The High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR) created a model complaint form and a corresponding information sheet. The procedures for the complaint procedure are described in Chap. 18 of the Rules of Procedure, as well as the formal requirements for individual complaints and the requirements for their admissibility (Rule 88, 97 ff.

The complaint must be submitted in writing, it must not be anonymous and must be written in one of the working languages ​​of the committee, for which the national legal process must be unsuccessful. The complaint can also be rejected on the grounds that the committee is not competent because the alleged violation is not contained in the IPbpR ( ratione materiae ) or it constitutes an abuse of the right to complain.

There is no deadline for a complaint in the Optional Protocol. The CCPR therefore set a period of five years after the last domestic decision (Rule 99 lit c Rules of Procedure). Submissions made after this deadline will be declared inadmissible ( ratione temporis ).

Neither was there a contractual provision stating that the submitted complaint could not be submitted to another international body. Therefore, several states made the same matter reservation to the individual complaint procedure, according to which the same complaint may not also be submitted to another international body (e.g. to the ECtHR , another UN treaty body , etc.) (Rule 90 para. 1 lit g Ordinance).

The complaints submitted to the UN are first formally examined by the UNHCHR Secretariat (rule 88 Rules of Procedure). Then the complaint is either rejected or registered and forwarded to the committee, which in turn examines the substantive admissibility of the complaint (Art. 5 IPbpR 1st FP, Rule 97 Rules of Procedure).

If the notification has not been accepted, the complainant will be informed of this in a standard letter. For the rejection of complaints submitted to the CERD, CAT and the CCPR, it uses the same form, in which mostly insufficient reasons are ticked, although this is not provided for and information would have to be obtained instead (Rule 90 Rules of Procedure). The secretariat only registers those complaints that are forwarded to the committee. No statistics are kept on the number of complaints already rejected by the Secretariat.

If the complaint has been accepted, it will be forwarded to the relevant state for a statement, whereupon the latter can raise the objection of inadmissibility (Art. 4 IPbpR 1st FP, Rule 92 Rules of Procedure). The committee is also trying to reach an amicable agreement. If the contracting state agrees, this is recorded in a decision ( discontinuance decision ) and the case is settled.

If no amicable agreement can be reached, the committee examines the formal admissibility of the complaint (Rule 97 ff. Rules of Procedure). If he declared the complaint to be inadmissible, then - in contrast to the Secretariat - he justified his decision of the inadmissibility. If the complaint has been admitted, he will deal with the content of the complaint (Rule 111 Rules of Procedure). If he discovers a breach of contract, he submits proposals and recommendations to the state on how to remedy this (Art. 5 Para. 4 IPbpR 1st FP)

The recommendations are not legally binding, their implementation cannot be enforced, only a follow-up procedure is provided in which the implementation of the recommendations is checked by the state and, if necessary, it will be discussed in the next state reporting process. Sanctions are not provided against fallible states.

Precautionary measures

When submitting the complaint, interim measures can also be requested at the same time if irreparable damage can occur. Such requests must be submitted as soon as possible - with the note Urgent Interim measures - so that the committee has sufficient time to examine the request and order such measures. The committee can also order precautionary measures of its own accord, but they do not constitute a decision on the admissibility of the complaint or the determination of a breach of contract by the state (Rule 94 Rules of Procedure).

Complaints to the CCPR and ECHR

If a state made the same matter - reservation, a complaint, e.g. regarding Art. 2 Para. 3 IPbpR and Art. 13 ECHR Right to an Effective Complaint, may not be submitted to a controlling body and the ECHR at the same time , because the facts are the same (same matter). However, it is permissible to lodge a complaint with the committee for a violation of Art. 11 IPbpR prohibition of arrest and with the ECtHR a complaint against Art. 12 ECHR right to marry , as there is no overlap but rather different breaches of contract by the same state.

There are complaints that were first submitted to the ECHR, but were not accepted by it, with the standard reasoning: the complaint does not appear to violate the rights and freedoms guaranteed in the Convention (ECHR) or its additional protocols . The complaint that was then submitted to the UN committee was then rejected on the grounds that it had allegedly been examined by the ECHR, although the ECHR did not examine the substance of the complaint, but did not accept it. In the meantime, the committee has made decisions in which it nevertheless examined the complaints.

In accordance with decision no. 577/2013 of the CAT committee of February 9, 2016, within the meaning of NB c. Russia for torture. The complainant had at the same time submitted an identical complaint to the ECHR (No. 33772/13), which is why the CAT committee rejected the complaint (see decision RZ 8.2). In the judgment database HUDOC of the ECHR, however, there is no judgment with the No. 33772/13, as the complaint was refused by the law firm and struck from the register - and therefore not examined by the ECHR.

Investigation procedure

The civil pact does not provide for an investigation procedure if there is reliable information about serious or systematic breaches of contract by a state. In the 1990s, the committee asked several such states to submit a state report on the matter. It concerned: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia, Burundi, Angola, Haiti, Rwanda and Nigeria , only Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Serbia submitted the requested report. In March 2004 the CCPR discussed the possibility of creating an express or ad hoc reporting mechanism for such cases.

When faced with such serious or systematic breaches of contract by a state, the committee can bring the matter to the attention of the UN General Assembly .

This then decides on how to proceed, because acts that are committed as part of an extensive or systematic attack against the civilian population are classified as crimes against humanity according to Article 7, Paragraph 1 of the Rome Statute and the International Criminal Court in The Hague is responsible for this if the fallible state recognized the International Criminal Court.

Statistics of complaints

Decisions of the UN Human Rights Committee
States Pending impermissible set violation No violation Registered
GermanyGermany Germany 0 17th 1 1 1 20th
LiechtensteinLiechtenstein Liechtenstein 0 0 0 0 0 0
AustriaAustria Austria 2 10 2 5 7th 26th
SwitzerlandSwitzerland Switzerland ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
115 states in total 450 586 338 954 162 2756

Switzerland has rejected the right to individual complaints. The figures are without the complaints already rejected by the UNHCHR Secretariat. The individual decisions can also be called up in the UN database.

General remarks

The Committee published the interpretation and clarification of certain provisions in the ICCPR General Comments (Engl. General comments ). They are intended to dispel misunderstandings and to assist the contracting states in fulfilling their contractual obligations.

  • GC No. 30 (2002): The reporting obligations of the contracting states under Article 40 of the Covenant
  • GC No. 31 (2004): The Legal Nature of Pact Obligations

Members of the CCPR

The members appointed according to Art. 28 - 39 IPbpR for 4 years each

Members country Until function
Ms. Tania María ABDO ROCHOLL ParaguayParaguay Paraguay 12/31/20 deputy Chairperson
Mr. Yadh BEN ACHOUR TunisiaTunisia Tunisia 12/31/22
Ms. Ilze BRANDS KEHRIS LatviaLatvia Latvia 12/31/20 Rapporteur
Mr. Christopher Arif BULKAN GuyanaGuyana Guyana 12/31/18
Mr. Ahmed Amin FATHALLA EgyptEgypt Egypt 12/31/20 Chairman
Mr. Shuichi FURUYA JapanJapan Japan 12/31/22
Mr. Christof HEYNS South AfricaSouth Africa South Africa 12/31/20
Mr. Bamariam KOITA MauritaniaMauritania Mauritania 12/31/20
Ms. Marcia. VJ CRANE CanadaCanada Canada 12/31/20
Mr. Duncan MUHUMUZA LAKI UgandaUganda Uganda 12/31/22
Ms. Photini PAZARTZIS GreeceGreece Greece 12/31/22 deputy Chairperson
Mr. Hernán QUEZADA CABRERA ChileChile Chile 12/31/22
Ms. Vasilka SANCIN SloveniaSlovenia Slovenia 12/31/22
Mr. José Manuel SANTOS PAIS PortugalPortugal Portugal 12/31/20
Mr. Yuval SHANY IsraelIsrael Israel 12/31/20 deputy Chairman
Ms. Hélène TIGROUDJA FranceFrance France 12/31/22
Mr. Andreas B. ZIMMERMANN GermanyGermany Germany 12/31/20
Mr. Gentian ZYBERI AlbaniaAlbania Albania 12/31/22

Additional information

Reports on the state reports

Contractual basis

Bibliography

See also

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b The abbreviation CCPR is used in all other official languages ​​of the committee except in Russian, including Arabic and Chinese, but as HRC by the German Foreign Office
  2. ↑ On March 23, 1976 the contract came into force, see Art. 49 Para. 1 IPbpR. The first election took place after 6 months, Art. 30 Para. 1 IPbpR
  3. ↑ Human Rights Bodies. UN human rights organs. Published by: UN High Commissioner for Human Rights , UNHCHR, accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  4. ^ The Core International Human Rights Instruments and their monitoring bodies. Published by UNHCHR , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  5. ↑ a b c d e f g h i International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Civil Pact, IPbpR. In: Liechtenstein Collection of Laws (LILEX). Retrieved March 24, 2019 .
  6. ↑ a b c d e 1st FP on the civil pact for individual complaints. IPbpR 1st FP. In: Liechtenstein Collection of Laws (LILEX). Retrieved March 24, 2019 .
  7. ↑ a b c d 2nd FP on the civil pact to abolish the death penalty. IPbpR 2nd FP. In: Liechtenstein Collection of Laws (LILEX). Retrieved March 24, 2019 .
  8. ^ The Human Rights Committee on the Civil Pact. In: Civil Pact. Published by: German Institute for Human Rights , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  9. ^ UN Human Rights Committee. In: UN: Human rights organs. Published by Humanrights.ch , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  10. ↑ Human Rights Committee. In: Human Rights Convention. Hrsg: Hrsg: Praetor Intermedia UG , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  11. ↑ a b Membership of the CCPR. Members of the CCPR. Ed: CCPR , accessed on July 29, 2019 (English).
  12. ↑ a b c Monitoring civil and political rights. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  13. ↑ Human Rights Council. Published by: German Institute for Human Rights , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  14. ↑ Human Rights Council - tasks and instruments. Published by Humanrights.ch , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  15. ↑ Human Rights Council - History. In: Human Rights Council. Published by Humanrights.ch , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  16. ↑ UN Human Rights Council. In: Enforce human rights. Published by: German Society for the United Nations e. V. (DGVN), accessed on March 24, 2019 (The Human Rights Council replaced the Human Rights Commission, which until 2006 had been the United Nations' most important body in the protection of human rights, but was increasingly exposed to criticism of its efficiency.).
  17. ↑ Decision of the UN General Assembly to create the Human Rights Council. (pdf) UN Resolution 60/251 of March 15, 2006. In: German Translation Service of the UN . Published by: UN General Assembly , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  18. ↑ ABC of the United Nations. (pdf) Ed .: German Foreign Office , accessed on March 24, 2019 . P. 156 Human Rights Committee (HRC) ; P. 159 The Human Rights Council (HRC)
  19. ↑ a b c Working methods. How the CCPR works. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  20. ↑ The state is only obliged under international law to comply with the treaty after ratification. In Germany, the dualistic system applies, in which the contract must first be transformed into national law before it becomes justiciable. In Lichtenstein, Austria and Switzerland the monistic system applies, according to which the treaty becomes applicable immediately upon ratification.
  21. ↑ According to Art. 2 WVK, a “reservation” is a unilateral declaration made by a state when it joins a treaty, by means of which the state aims to exclude or change the legal effect of individual treaty provisions in this state
  22. ↑ a b c d e Ratification status of the IPbpR - Status of treaties. In: Treaty collection of the UN . Retrieved March 24, 2019 .
  23. ↑ a b c d Ratification status from the 1st FP to the IPbpR - Status of treaties. for individual complaints. In: Treaty collection of the UN . Retrieved March 24, 2019 .
  24. ↑ Procedure for complaints by individuals under the human rights treaties. Complaints procedure. In: Human Rights Bodies. Published by UNHCHR , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  25. ↑ a b c d Ratification status from 2nd FP on the IPbpR - Status of treaties. Abolition of the death penalty. In: Treaty collection of the UN . Retrieved March 24, 2019 .
  26. ↑ a b Inter-State Complaints. State complaints. In: Human Rights Bodies. Published by UNHCHR , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  27. ↑ Human rights treaty . Published by: German Institute for Human Rights , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  28. ↑ Resolution adopted by the General Assembly 2200 (XXI) A - C. Ed .: UN General Assembly , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  29. ^ Resolution adopted by the General Assembly. UN Res. A / RES / 21/2200. Published by: UN General Assembly , December 16, 1966, accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  30. ^ The Civil Pact (ICCPR). Published by: German Institute for Human Rights , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  31. ^ Procedure under the OP-ICCPR. Complaint procedure according to Civil Pact 1st FP. In: Human Rights Bodies. Published by UNHCHR , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  32. ↑ UN Resolution A / RES / 44/128, IPbpR 2nd FP. adopted by the GA on December 15, 1989 in session 44. Retrieved March 24, 2019 .
  33. ↑ Germany: Reporting status; Acceptance of individual complaints; Acceptance of the inquiry procedure. Summary of all contracts. Published by: UNHCHR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (for more information, see Status of Treaties).
  34. ↑ Liechtenstein: Reporting status; Acceptance of individual complaints; Acceptance of the inquiry procedure. Summary of all contracts. Published by: UNHCHR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (for more information, see Status of Treaties).
  35. ↑ Austria: Reporting status; Acceptance of individual complaints; Acceptance of the inquiry procedure. Summary of all contracts. Published by: UNHCHR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (for more information, see Status of Treaties).
  36. ↑ Switzerland: Reporting status; Acceptance of individual complaints; Acceptance of the inquiry procedure. Summary of all contracts. Published by: UNHCHR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (for more information, see Status of Treaties).
  37. ^ The extensions by 5 years took place on: June 18, 1992; April 25, 1997; May 11, 2010; March 27, 2017
  38. ↑ a b c d Rules of procedure, Rules of Procedure of the CCPR. Version CCPR /C/3/Rev.11 dated January 9, 2019. Published by CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  39. ↑ a b c IV. Follow-up to concluding observations / comments. In: How the CCPR works. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  40. ^ II. Guidelines for reporting by States parties. In: How the CCPR works. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  41. ↑ a b State report procedure. In: Civil Pact. Published by: German Institute for Human Rights , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  42. ↑ control procedure; Reporting process. In: Pact II (civil rights). Published by Humanrights.ch , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  43. ↑ reporting system. In: Control procedure. Published by Praetor Intermedia UG , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  44. ↑ Guidelines for the treaty-specific document to be submitted by States parties under article 40 of the ICCPR. State Reports Policy; Version CCPR / C / 2009/1 of November 22, 2010. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  45. ^ States parties reports. State reports submitted. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  46. ↑ III. Consideration of reports of States parties by the Committee. In: How the CCPR works. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  47. ↑ Decision simplified reporting procedure. (pdf) The simplified state reporting procedure; Version CCPR / C / 123/3 dated December 6, 2018. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  48. ↑ UN Res. 68/268 Strengthening and enhancing the effective functioning of the human rights treaty body system. (PDF) Published by: UN General Assembly , April 21, 2014, accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  49. ↑ UN Res. 68/268 Strengthening and improving the effective functioning of the system of human rights treaty bodies. (PDF) German translation. In: Refworld.org. Published by: UN General Assembly , April 21, 2014, accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  50. ↑ Optional reporting procedure. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  51. ↑ Lists of issues (LOIs & LOIPR). Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  52. ^ A. Pre-session working group. In: How the CCPR works. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  53. ↑ Replies to LOIs. Answering the questions of the CCPR - the new periodical state reports. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  54. ↑ Simplified reporting procedure. simplified state reporting procedure. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  55. ^ Information for Civil Society Organizations. Information for NGOs, version CCPR / C / 104/3 of June 4, 2012. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  56. ^ Info from Civil Society Organizations. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  57. ^ Information for National Human Rights Institutions. Information for NHRIs, version CCPR / C / 106/3 dated November 13, 2012. Ed: CCPR , accessed March 24, 2019 .
  58. ↑ Info from NHRIs. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  59. ^ VIII. Participation of NGOs and NHRIs in the activities of the Committees. In: How the CCPR works. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  60. ↑ B. Constructive dialogue. In: How the CCPR works. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  61. ↑ Admission to negotiations with the committee. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  62. ^ V. Strategies to encourage reporting by States parties. In: How the CCPR works. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  63. ↑ Concluding Observations. Final observations. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  64. ↑ C. Concluding observations / comments. In: How the CCPR works. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  65. ↑ a b Legal instruments. (pdf) In: ABC of Human Rights. Published by: Federal Department of Foreign Affairs , FDFA, p. 10 , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  66. ↑ Follow-up to concluding observations procedure. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  67. ↑ UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. Published by: German Institute for Human Rights , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  68. ^ List of States parties without overdue reports - Late and non-reporting States. Published by UNHCHR , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  69. ^ Draft of the IPbpR. (pdf) Retrieved March 24, 2019 (English). Alternative link page 91 a Art. 40 (nArt. 41) State complaint, p. 94, here the express consent was added (... was subsequently revised to ...)
  70. ^ State complaint. In: Control procedure. Published by Praetor Intermedia UG , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  71. ↑ The admissibility of the complaint. The admissibility of individual complaints. In: Human Rights Bodies. Published by UNHCHR , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  72. ↑ The International Court of Justice. Chapter XIV of the United Nations Constitution. In: Liechtenstein Collection of Laws (LILEX). Retrieved March 24, 2019 .
  73. ^ Agreement for the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes. In: Liechtenstein Collection of Laws (LILEX). Retrieved March 24, 2019 .
  74. ↑ Dispute settlement procedure according to the UN civil pact and ECHR. In: ICCPR - Institutions. Published by Praetor Intermedia UG , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  75. ^ Agreement for the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes. In: Liechtenstein Collection of Laws . Retrieved March 24, 2019 .
  76. ↑ European Convention for the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes. In: Liechtenstein Collection of Laws . Retrieved March 24, 2019 .
  77. ↑ a b Judgment No. 5310/71 of the ECHR of January 18, 1978 in Ireland c. England. for violation of Art. 1; 3; 5; 6 and Art. 15 ECHR. In: HUDOC . Ed: ECHR , accessed March 24, 2019 .
  78. ^ Diane E. Beaver: Legal Brief on Proposed Counter-Resistance Strategies. (pdf) In: Torture Memos . Published by: Department of Defense of the USA, October 11, 2002, accessed on March 24, 2019 (English): “S. 7, points 1 & 2 of the US to the reservation in the IPbpR and point 6 the reference to the judgment of the ECHR in Ireland c. England “ Web Archive: Beaver Memo
    wikisource: Beaver Memo of Oct 11, 2002, Legal Brief on Proposed Counter-Resistance Strategies
  79. ↑ General Jay S. Bybee: Memorandum for A. Gonzales: (Re) Standards for Conduct for Interrogation under 18 USC 2340-2340A. (pdf) In: Torture Memos . Editor: US Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel, August 1, 2002, accessed on March 24, 2019 (English): “S. 27 below European Court of Human Rights, p. 28 f, the judgment of the ECHR in Ireland c. England and the methods of torture applied by Engand - The European Court of Human Rights concluded that these techniques used in combination, and applied for hours at a time, were inhuman and degrading but did not amount to torture. ” Facsimile: Memorandum for A. Gonzales
  80. ↑ Steven G. Bradbury: Memorandum for John Rizzo N ° 13, Re: Application of 18 USc §§ 2340-2340A to the Combined Use of Certain Techniques in the Interrogation of High Value al Qaeda Detainees. (pdf) about waterboarding and other techniques. In: Torture Memos . Ed: US Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel, May 10, 2005, accessed on March 24, 2019 : “S. 31 below, judgment of the ECHR in Ireland c. England - the torture methods used by England are based on America. Legally admissible as, according to the ECtHR, it is not torture, but only inhuman treatment ” Web Archive: Memorandum for John Rizzo
  81. ↑ Steven G. Bradbury: Memorandum for John Rizzo N ° 11; Re: Application of 18 USC §§ 2340-2340A to the Combined Use of Certain Techniques in the Interrogation of High Value al Qaeda Detainees. (PDF) In: Torture Memos. Editor: US Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel, May 30, 2005, archived from the original ; accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  82. ↑ Judgment No. 5310/71 of the ECHR of March 20, 2018 in Ireland c. England. Request for appeal by Ireland. In: HUDOC . Ed: ECHR , accessed March 24, 2019 .
  83. ^ The procedure. Complaints procedure. In: Human Rights Bodies. Published by UNHCHR , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  84. ↑ Individual complaint . In: ICCPR - Institutions. Published by Praetor Intermedia UG , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  85. ↑ Individual complaint . In: Civil Pact. Published by: German Institute for Human Rights , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  86. ↑ General Comment No. 33 on the First Optional Protocol. In: General Comments of the CCPR. Published by Humanrights.ch , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  87. ↑ Model complaint form. (Doc) Complaint form for the CERD, CAT, CCPR committee. Published by UNHCHR , accessed March 24, 2019 .
  88. ↑ Individual Complaint Procedures under the United Nations Human Rights Treaties. (pdf) Information sheet on the complaints procedure. Published by UNHCHR , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  89. ↑ a b Recent jurisprudence. The more recent decisions of the committee. Ed: CCPR , accessed March 24, 2019 (it contains only the complaints registered by the secretariat and forwarded to the committee).
  90. ↑ Guidelines on measures of reparation under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Version CCPR / C / 158 of November 30, 2016. Published by CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  91. ↑ Special circumstances of urgency or sensitivity. Precautionary measures. In: Human Rights Bodies. Published by UNHCHR , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  92. ↑ CAT: rejected because of the standard rejection of the ECHR. Decision No. 642/2014 of the CAT of October 9, 2015 in terms of MT c. Sweden. Hrsg: CAT, accessed on March 24, 2019 (complaint was rejected by the ECHR after 3 days (unread?) With a serial letter): "RZ 2.10: the Court, sitting in a single-judge formation, found that they did not disclose any appearance of violation of the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention or its Protocols and declared your application inadmissible. "
  93. ↑ CAT: Standard rejection of the ECHR. Decision No. 643/2014 of the CAT of February 16, 2016 in the sense of Mr. U. c. Sweden. Hrsg: CAT, accessed on March 24, 2019 (complaint was (unread?) Rejected the next day by the ECHR with a serial letter): "RZ 2.6: the Court (...), sitting in a single-judge formation, found that they did not disclose any appearance of violation of the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention or its Protocols and declared your application inadmissible "
  94. ↑ Checked despite standard rejection of the ECHR - violation. Decision No. 2008/2010 of the CCPR of September 30, 2014 in the sense of Ali Aarrass c. Spain. Retrieved on March 24, 2019 (complaint was rejected by the ECHR with a serial letter): "RZ 2.20: On 11 May 2010, the Court, in single judge formation, (...)" for failing to meet the requirements of the Convention " , on the grounds that it did not "disclose any violation of the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Convention or its Protocols". "
  95. ↑ Decision No. 577/2013 of the CAT iS NB c. Russia for torture. Retrieved March 24, 2019 .
  96. ↑ Inquiries. Investigation procedure for systemic breaches of contract. In: Human Rights Bodies. Published by UNHCHR , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  97. ↑ XII. Other matters, early warning measures and urgent procedures. Early warning and urgency procedures. In: How the CCPR works. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  98. ^ Roman Statute of the International Criminal Court. In: Liechtenstein Collection of Laws (LILEX). Retrieved March 24, 2019 .
  99. ^ Statistics of the committee . Retrieved June 8, 2017.
  100. ↑ UN decision database
  101. ↑ IX. General comments / recommendations. In: How the CCPR works. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  102. ↑ General comments. General remarks. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  103. ↑ General Comments. In: Civil Pact. Published by: German Institute for Human Rights , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  104. ↑ General Comments of the UN Human Rights Committee. In: General Comments of the CCPR. Published by Humanrights.ch , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  105. ↑ General Comment No. 30 - Reporting Obligations of States parties under article 40 of the Covenant. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).
  106. ↑ General Comment No. 31 on Art. 2 Para. 1 Pact II. Ed . : Humanrights.ch , accessed on March 24, 2019 .
  107. ↑ General Comment No. 31 Nature of the General Legal Obligation Imposed on States Parties to the Covenant. Ed: CCPR , accessed on March 24, 2019 (English).