Bayefsky.com

The United Nations Human Rights Treaties

Jurisprudence

CCPR - Belarus

List of all admissibility decisions

Case Name Comm Number Date Outcome
Kharkhal v. Belarus 1161/2003 31 October 2007 Inadmissible
Korneenko v. Belarus 1358/2005 01 April 2008 Inadmissible
Gerashchenko v. Belarus 1537/2006 23 October 2009 Inadmissible
I. S. v. Belarus 1994/2010 25 March 2011 Inadmissible
P. L. v. Belarus 1814/2008 26 July 2011 Inadmissible
V. S. v. Belarus 1749/2008 31 October 2011 Inadmissible
A. I. v. Belarus 1606/2007 26 March 2012 Inadmissible
Krasovskaya & Krasovskay v. Belarus 1820/2008 26 March 2012 Inadmissible
Korneenko v. Belarus 1634/2007 26 March 2012 Inadmissible
S.K. v. Belarus 2169/2012 31 October 2012 Inadmissible
Yachnik v. Belarus 1990/2010 21 July 2014 Inadmissible
E.V. v. Belarus 1989/2010 30 October 2014 Inadmissible
S.V. v. Belarus 2047/2011 30 March 2016 Inadmissible
V.L. v. Belarus 2084/2011 30 March 2016 Inadmissible
Y.Z. v. Belarus 2135/2012 03 November 2016 Inadmissible
K.A. v. Belarus 2112/2011 03 November 2016 Inadmissible

Information in this section of Bayefsky.com is as of May 2018. To update use the UN website search engine here.

CERD, CCPR, CESCR, CEDAW, CAT, CRC, CMW, CRPD and CED all have optional complaint mechanisms, whereby an individual may complain to the respective treaty body that his or her rights under the treaty have been violated. The CMW complaint mechanism is not yet in force.

Included in this section are:

  1. requests made by the treaty body for interim measures
  2. decisions to deal jointly with cases
  3. admissibility decisions (normally decisions determining a complaint is admissible are not issued separately and hence this category involves decisions in which complaints are found to be inadmissible)
  4. final views.

Information on follow-up of final Views where a violation has been found is included in the section entitled "Follow-up: Jurisprudence".