The United Nations Human Rights Treaties

Case Name	Comm Number	Date	Articles	Outcome
I.S. v. Hungary	389/1989	09 November 1990		Inadmissible
Párkányi v. Hungary	410/1990	22 March 1991		Admissible
Párkányi v. Hungary	410/1990	27 July 1992	10, 14(1, 3e)	Violation
T.P. v. Hungary	496/1992	30 March 1993		Inadmissible
Kulomin v. Hungary	521/1992	16 March 1994		Admissible
E. and A.K. v. Hungary	520/1992	07 April 1994		Inadmissible
Kulomin v. Hungary	521/1992	22 March 1996	9(3), 10, 14	Violation
Somers v. Hungary	566/1993	23 July 1996	26	No Violation
Kalaba v. Hungary	735/1997	07 November 1997		Inadmissible
Borisenko v. Hungary	852/1999	14 October 2002	9(1),(2),(3),14(3)(d)	Violation
Paladjian v. Hungary	1106/2002	31 March 2004		Inadmissible

Information is as of 31 October 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".