The United Nations Human Rights Treaties

Case Name	Comm Number	Date	Articles	Outcome
B. J. v. Germany	1/2003	14 July 2004		Inadmissible
A. T. v. Hungary	2/2003	26 January 2005	2(a,b,e), 5(a), 16	Violation
Kayhan v. Turkey	8/2005	27 January 2006		Inadmissible
Szijjarto v. Hungary	4/2004	14 August 2006	10(h), 12, 16(1e)	Violation
Nguyen v. The Netherlands	3/2004	14 August 2006	11(2, 2b)	No Violation
Salgado v. United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland	11/2006	22 January 2007		Inadmissible
N.S.E. v. United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland	10/2005	30 May 2007		Inadmissible
Goekce v. Austria	5/2005	06 August 2007	1, 2(a,c-f), 3	Violation
Yildirim v. Austria	6/2005	06 August 2007	1, 2(a,c-f), 3	Violation
Muñoz Vargas and de Vicuña v. Spain	7/2005	09 August 2007		Inadmissible

Information is as of 18 July 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".