The United Nations Human Rights Treaties

Case Name	Comm Number	Date	Outcome
Drbal v. Czech Republic	498/1992	22 July 1994	Inadmissible
Malik v. Czech Republic	669/1995	21 October 1998	Inadmissible
Schlosser v. Czech Republic	670/1995	21 October 1998	Inadmissible
Jakes and Mazurkiewiczova v. Czech Republic	724/1996	26 July 1999	Inadmissible
Koutny v. Czech Republic	807/1998	20 March 2000	Inadmissible
Hruska v. Czech Republic	1191/2003	30 October 2003	Inadmissible
Soltes v. Czech Republic (and Slovakia)	1034 and 1035/2001	28 October 2005	Inadmissible
Smídek v. Czech Republic	1062/2002	25 July 2006	Inadmissible
Chytil v. Czech Republic	1452/2006	24 July 2007	Inadmissible
Schmidl v. Czech Republic	1515/2006	01 April 2008	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".