The United Nations Human Rights Treaties

Case Name	Comm Number	Date	Outcome
Barzana v. Chile	740/1998	23 July 1998	Inadmissible
Acuña Inostroza et al. v. Chile	717/1996	23 July 1999	Inadmissible
Vargas v. Chile	718/1996	26 July 1999	Inadmissible
Menanteau v. Carrasco v. Chile	746/1997	26 July 1999	Inadmissible
Yurich v. Chile	1078/2002	02 November 2005	Inadmissible

Information is as of 24 August 2008.

CERD, CCPR, CAT, CEDAW, CMW, Disability Convention and Enforced disappearances Convention 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 and Enforced disappearances Convention complaint mechanisms are not yet in force.

Included in this section are:

requests made by the treaty body for interim measures
decisions to deal jointly with cases
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)
final views.

The Human Rights Committee (under CCPR), the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (under CERD), the Committee Against Torture (under CAT) and the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (under CEDAW) also formally follow up on final Views where a violation has been found. This information is included in the section entitled "Follow-up: Jurisprudence".