Bayefsky.com

The United Nations Human Rights Treaties

Jurisprudence

CCPR - Latvia

List of all final views

Case Name Comm Number Date Articles Outcome
Perel v. Latvia 650/1995 30 March 1998 14 No Violation
Ignatane v. Latvia 884/1999 25 July 2001 2, 25 Violation
Raihman v. Latvia 1621/2007 28 October 2010 17 Violation

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".