’WPC  #²F…£Eö„QĪs3ŠĖœ5v\ē&ßŌ"A¬6‚÷PNĄ°} ā^„EWōŪ;s„nēś«HD›%ŌTv‰mG‡ć¹^^’JĘM¬T ©XĪĪ]”œŅń%tN8˜„œČz /pĀš š^eśŚ?Š®Óµłb‹#k”gˆ¬×b^čš{\ÖĪ‚ąœ%W2KšJ#ČÉ4Y„Ųżu÷O½°>;†–ŃI“<Ē·Ńįcją—×µX7Ź+{Ó;va)y•bV]½+”ö˜ų-Ęg>Ó’Ś®&!ģéÆ~ĶiYŁe”žįÄ Ö.:Źøć\§ĖėöLŅ“JĒ$5&|Ž Ŗ–øvžõÓƛ«k†4æ2$Ę­6+ĖźGh–ŌbŁÓĘ’ł›ļP“×qpVŁšcī‚1ĮuGäø—eņ—F©ž1”MYkOs“ܚĀ–?“q“³Ž'*Č1=X¾ \‰eŽBĢ€ 0nL 0iŗ 0Y# 0_| 0&ŪU6 %7 = 0ĘM #Į UNŌ Ō M" (& NN ^ P w\ 4` t mv ō\  `‹&Times New Roman' United Nations Human Rights Website - Treaty Bodies Database - Document - Jurisprudence - 4nt - Jurisprudence - "Angie Dituri"0Angie Dituri .   <’’:Default ParaŌ€ōōōŌŌ€XXXŌ< ’’:Normal (Web)Ō S ŌÓ =jSÓÓ =jSÓ6’’4HyperlinkóóņņŌ ’ ŌóóŌ  Ō<’’:FollowedHypeóóņņŌ  ŌóóŌ  Ō<qy’’:HTML TypewriŌ€ōōōŌŌK€<ž6X9`(‹Courier NewKŌŌ  ŌŌ€XXXŌŌS€ō\  `‹&Times New RomanSŌŌ  Ō<ž6X9`(‹Courier New X#|x(ž…²$””ŅÜ°ŅŅÜ°ŅŌ..ŌŌ  ŌŌ  ŌÓ  ÓŌ€ Xz¼XX XŌŌ€Xz¼XX Xz¼ŌŌŌ˜HP LaserJet 6P/6MP - Standard,ä,,,,,ä0(ČhH  Z‹6Times New Roman Regular%”ņ* Äpģ* ’U‹’ĄĄĄŻ ƒ …²!ŻŅÜ°ŅŅÜ°ŅŌ..ŌŌ  ŌŌ  ŌÓ  ÓŌ€ Xu0XX XŌŌ€Xu0XX Xu0ŌŌŌŻ  ŻŌ_Ōņ ņCOMMITTEE€ON€THE€ELIMINATION€OF€RACIAL€DISCRIMINATIONŠ ° ŠĢņņŌ_ŌBarbaroŌ_Ō€v.€AustraliaóóŠ |Ģ ŠĢCommunication€No€7/1995Š H˜ ŠĢ14€August€1997Š  d ŠĢŌ_ŌCERDŌ_Ō/C/51/D/7/1995Š ą 0 ŠĢĢADMISSIBILITYó óŠ ’ā  ŠĢĢņņņņSubmitted€byóó:€Paul€Ō_ŌBarbaroŌ_Ō€Š D”  ŠĢņņAlleged€victimóó:€The€author€Š ` ŠĢņņState€partyóó:€Australia€Š Ü, ŠĢņņDate€of€communicationóó:€31€March€1995€(initial€submission)óó€Š Øų ŠĢĢņņÓ  ÓÓ  ÓThe€Committee€on€the€Elimination€of€Racial€Discriminationóó,€established€under€article€8€ofŠ ZŖ Šthe€International€Convention€on€the€Elimination€of€All€Forms€of€Racial€Discrimination,€Š @ ŠĢņņMeetingóó€on€14€August€1997,€Š  \ ŠĢņņAdoptsóó€the€following:€Š Ų( ŠŠ ŠņņĢÓUÓņ ņDecision€on€admissibilityó óóóŠ Š Ś ŠÓÓĢĢ1.€The€author€of€the€communication€is€Paul€Ō_ŌBarbaroŌ_Ō,€who€is€of€Italian€origin€and€currentlyŠ <#Œ" Šresides€in€Golden€Grove,€South€Australia.€He€contends€that€he€has€been€a€victim€of€racialŠ "$r# Šdiscrimination€by€Australia,€although€he€does€not€invoke€the€provisions€of€the€InternationalŠ %X $ ŠConvention€on€the€Elimination€of€All€Forms€of€Racial€Discrimination.€Australia€made€theŠ ī%>!% Šdeclaration€under€article€14,€paragraph€1,€of€the€Convention€on€28€January€1993.€Š Ō&$"& ŠĢņņThe€facts€as€presented€by€the€authoróó€Š  (š#( ŠĢ2.1€On€25€June€1986,€the€author€obtained€temporary€employment€at€the€Casino€of€Adelaide,Š l*¼%* ŠSouth€Australia;€he€initially€worked€as€a€bar€porter,€and€subsequently€as€an€attendant.€On€16Š R+¢&+ ŠApril€1987,€the€Liquor€Licensing€Commissioner€(LLC)€of€the€South€Australian€LiquorŠ 8,ˆ', ŠLicensing€Commission,€which€is€responsible€for€supervising€the€observance€of€the€rulesŠ -n(- ŠŌ_Ōgoverning€the€management€of€the€Adelaide€Casino,€and€must€ensure€that€its€operations€areŠ ° Šsubject€to€continued€scrutiny,€withdrew€the€author's€temporary€employment€licence€andŠ –ę Šrefused€to€approve€his€permanent€employment€with€the€Casino.€A€hearing,€during€which€theŠ |Ģ ŠLLC€questioned€the€author€on€a€number€of€points€and€discussed€his€concerns,€was€held€onŠ b² Š30€April€1987.€Š H˜ ŠĢ2.2€In€September€1993,€well€over€six€years€later,€the€author€complained€to€the€AustralianŠ  d ŠHuman€Rights€and€Equal€Opportunities€Commission€(Ō_ŌHREOCŌ_Ō),€claiming€that€the€LiquorŠ ś J ŠLicensing€Commissioner's€decision€had€been€unlawful€under€sections€9€and€15€of€Australia'sŠ ą 0 ŠRace€Discrimination€Act€of€1975.€He€argued,€ņņinter€aliaóó,€that€the€Liquor€LicensingŠ Ę   ŠCommissioner€had€decided€against€his€obtaining€a€permanent€contract€because€of€his€and€hisŠ ¬ ü  Šfamily's€Italian€(Ō_ŌCalabrianŌ_Ō)€origin,€because€some€of€his€relatives€were€allegedly€involved€inŠ ’ā  Šcriminal€activities,€notably€trafficking€of€illegal€drugs,€of€which€he€did€not€know€anything.Š xČ  ŠMr.€Ō_ŌBarbaroŌ_Ō€contends€that€this€attitude€effectively€restricts€the€possibilities€for€employmentŠ ^®  Šfor€Italians€who€are€not€themselves€criminals€but€who€may€have€relatives€that€are.€In€supportŠ D”  Šof€his€argument,€the€author€refers€to€letters€of€support€from€Peter€Duncan,€M.P.,€whoŠ *z  Šseriously€questioned€and€denounced€this€perceived€practice€of€"guilt€by€association".€Š ` ŠĢ2.3€The€author€refers€to€similar€cases€in€which€the€ethnic€background€of€applicants€forŠ Ü, Šemployment€in€licensed€casinos€was€adduced€as€a€reason€for€not€approving€employment.€InŠ Ā Šparticular,€he€refers€to€the€case€of€Carmine€Alvaro,€decided€by€the€Supreme€Court€of€SouthŠ Øų ŠAustralia€in€December€1986,€who€was€refused€permanent€employment€because€of€hisŠ ŽŽ Šfamily's€involvement€in€the€cultivation€and€sale€of€illegal€drugs.€In€this€case,€the€LLC€hadŠ tÄ Šstated€that€he€had€been€advised€by€the€police€that€they€had€received€information€that€one€ofŠ ZŖ Šthe€drug€families€of€the€area€would€attempt€to€place€a€"plant"€at€the€Casino.€Š @ ŠĢ2.4€The€Ō_ŌHREOCŌ_Ō€forwarded€the€author's€complaint€to€the€South€Australian€Attorney„Š  \ ŠGeneral's€Department€for€comments.€The€latter€informed€the€Ō_ŌHREOCŌ_Ō€that€the€"sole€reasonŠ ņB Šfor€refusing€[the€author's]€employment€was€to€ensure€the€integrity€of€the€Adelaide€CasinoŠ Ų( Šand€public€confidence€in€that€institution".€Reference€was€made€in€this€context€to€a€reportŠ ¾ Šfrom€the€Commissioner€of€Police,€which€stated:€Š ¤ō ŠĢ"Paul€Ō_ŌBarbaroŌ_Ō€has€no€convictions€in€this€state.€He€is€a€member€of€a€broad€family€groupŠ p!Ą  Šwhich,€in€my€opinion,€can€only€be€described€as€a€major€organized€crime€group€...€EighteenŠ V"¦! Šmembers€of€this€group€have€been€convicted€of€major€drug€offences€...€The€offences€areŠ <#Œ" Šspread€across€four€States€of€Australia.€All€are€of€Italian€extraction.€All€are€related€byŠ "$r# Šmarriage€or€direct€blood€lines."€Š %X $ ŠĢ2.5€There€were€some€discrepancies€between€the€author's€and€the€LLC's€assertions€in€respectŠ Ō&$"& Šof€the€degree€of€some€of€the€relationships,€in€particular€the€relationships€established€by€theŠ ŗ' #' Šmarriages€of€the€author's€siblings.€The€author€emphasized€that€he€had€maintained€a€certainŠ  (š#( Šautonomy€from€his€relatives€and€that€he€did€not€know€personally€many€of€the€people€listedŠ †)Ö$) Šin€the€Police€Commissioner's€report.€He€also€insisted€that€he€knew€nothing€of€his€relatives'Š l*¼%* Šprevious€drug„related€offences.€Š R+¢&+ ŠĢ2.6€On€30€November€1994,€the€Racial€Discrimination€Commissioner€of€the€Ō_ŌHREOCŌ_Ō€rejectedŠ -n(- Šthe€author's€claims€concerning€his€unlawful€dismissal,€having€determined€that€it€was€theŠ ° Šauthor's€perceived€or€actual€relationships€with€individuals€who€have€criminal€records,€andŠ –ę Šnot€his€Italian€ethnic€origin,€which€was€the€basis€for€the€LLC's€decision.€The€RaceŠ |Ģ ŠDiscrimination€Commissioner€stated€that€"[Ō_ŌT]heŌ_Ō€fact€that€[he]€and€[his]€family€members€areŠ b² Šof€Italian€origin€or€descent€is€not€germane"€to€the€solution€of€the€case.€Š H˜ ŠĢ2.7€On€7€December€1994,€the€author€appealed€for€review€of€the€Racial€DiscriminationŠ  d ŠCommissioner's€decision.€By€decision€of€21€March€1995,€the€President€of€the€Ō_ŌHREOCŌ_ŌŠ ś J Šconfirmed€the€decision€of€the€Racial€Discrimination€Commissioner,€holding€that€there€wasŠ ą 0 Šno€evidence€that€the€author's€ethnic€background€had€been€a€factor€in€the€LLC's€decision.€Š Ę   ŠĢņņThe€complaintóó€Š ’ā  ŠĢ3.€Although€the€author€does€not€invoke€any€provision€of€the€Convention,€it€transpires€fromŠ ^®  Šhis€communication€that€he€claims€a€violation€by€the€State€party€of€articles€1,€paragraph€1,Š D”  Šand€5€(a)€and€(e)€(Ō_ŌiŌ_Ō)€of€the€Convention.€Š *z  ŠĢņņState€party's€submission€on€the€admissibility€of€the€communication€and€author's€commentsŠ öF Šthereonóó€Š Ü, ŠĢ4.1€By€submission€of€March€1996,€the€State€party€challenges€the€admissibility€of€theŠ Øų Šcommunication€on€several€grounds.€It€first€supplements€the€facts€as€presented€by€the€author.Š ŽŽ ŠThus,€the€State€party€notes€that€when€obtaining€temporary€employment€in€1986,€the€authorŠ tÄ Šgave€the€Police€Commissioner€for€South€Australia€written€authorization€to€release€to€theŠ ZŖ ŠLLC€particulars€of€all€convictions€and€other€information€that€the€Police€Department€mayŠ @ Šhave€had€on€him.€On€25€June€1986,€Mr.€Ō_ŌBarbaroŌ_Ō€acknowledged€in€writing€that€the€grantingŠ &v Šof€temporary€employment€was€subject€to€all€enquiries€made€concerning€his€application€forŠ  \ Šapproval€as€a€Casino€employee€being€concluded€to€the€satisfaction€of€the€LLC,€and€thatŠ ņB Štemporary€approval€could€be€withdrawn€at€any€time.€Š Ų( ŠĢ4.2€On€30€April€1987,€the€author,€accompanied€by€his€lawyer€and€two€character€witnesses,Š ¤ō Šattended€a€hearing€before€the€LLC,€during€which€the€LLC€explained€his€concern€that€theŠ Š Ś Šauthor€had€an€association€with€an€organized€crime€group.€The€author€was€given€anŠ p!Ą  Šopportunity€to€comment€on€the€evidence€which€had€been€provided€to€the€LLC€by€the€PoliceŠ V"¦! ŠCommissioner.€Š <#Œ" ŠĢ4.3€In€relation€to€the€author's€complaint€before€the€Ō_ŌHREOCŌ_Ō,€the€State€party€notes€that€afterŠ %X $ Šthe€dismissal€of€Mr.€Ō_ŌBarbaroŌ_Ō's€complaint€by€the€Race€Discrimination€Commissioner,€theŠ ī%>!% Šauthor€gave€notice€of€appeal€to€have€the€decision€reviewed€under€section€Ō_Ō24AAŌ_Ō€9(1)€of€theŠ Ō&$"& ŠRace€Discrimination€Act€(RDA),€the€President€of€the€Ō_ŌHREOCŌ_Ō,€Sir€Ronald€Wilson,€a€formerŠ ŗ' #' ŠHigh€Court€judge,€confirmed€the€decision€in€accordance€with€section€Ō_Ō24AAŌ_Ō€2(b)(Ō_ŌiŌ_Ō)€of€theŠ  (š#( ŠRDA,€holding€that€there€was€no€evidence€that€the€author's€ethnic€origin€constituted€a€groundŠ †)Ö$) Šfor€the€alleged€discrimination.€Š l*¼%* ŠĢ4.4€The€State€party€contends€that€the€case€is€inadmissible€as€incompatible€with€the€provisionsŠ 8,ˆ', Šof€the€Convention,€on€the€basis€of€rule€91(c)€of€the€Committee's€rules€of€procedure,€as€theŠ -n(- ŠŌ_ŌCommittee€is€said€to€lack€the€competence€to€deal€with€the€communication.€In€this€context,Š ° Šthe€State€party€affirms€that€Australian€law€and€the€RDA€conform€with€the€provisions€of€theŠ –ę ŠConvention.€The€RDA€was€enacted€by€the€Federal€Government€and€implements€articles€2Š |Ģ Šand€5€of€the€Convention€by€making€racial€discrimination€unlawful€and€ensuring€equalityŠ b² Šbefore€the€law€(sections€9€and€10).€The€wording€of€section€9€closely€follows€the€wording€ofŠ H˜ Šthe€definition€of€racial€discrimination€in€article€1€of€the€Convention.€Section€15€of€the€RDAŠ . ~ Šimplements€the€provisions€of€article€5€of€the€Convention€in€relation€to€employment.Š  d ŠMoreover,€the€HREOC€is€a€national€authority€established€in€1986€for€the€purpose€ofŠ ś J Šreceiving€and€investigating€alleged€breaches€of€the€RDA.€Members€of€the€HREOC€areŠ ą 0 Šstatutory€appointees€and€as€such€enjoy€a€high€degree€of€independence.€HREOC€investigatedŠ Ę   Šthe€author's€case€thoroughly€and€found€no€evidence€of€racial€discrimination.€Š ¬ ü  ŠĢ4.5€In€the€light€of€the€above,€the€State€party€argues€that€it€would€be€inappropriate€for€theŠ xČ  ŠCommittee€to€effectively€review€the€decision€of€the€HREOC.€While€it€concedes€that€theŠ ^®  Šissue€of€whether€the€decision€of€the€HREOC€was€arbitrary,€amounted€to€a€denial€of€justiceŠ D”  Šor€violated€its€obligation€of€impartiality€and€independence,€would€fall€within€theŠ *z  ŠCommittee's€jurisdiction,€it€contends€that€the€author€did€not€submit€any€evidence€to€thisŠ ` Šeffect.€Rather,€the€evidence€contained€in€the€transcript€of€the€hearing€before€the€LLC€and€theŠ öF Šcorrespondence€with€the€HREOC€indicate€that€the€author's€claim€was€considered€within€theŠ Ü, Šterms€both€of€the€RDA€and€the€Convention.€Š Ā ŠĢ4.6€The€State€party€further€submits€that€the€complaint€is€inadmissible€on€the€basis€of€lack€ofŠ ŽŽ Šsubstantiation,€arguing€that€the€author€did€not€provide€any€evidence€that€his€treatmentŠ tÄ Šamounted€to€a€"distinction,€exclusion,€restriction,€or€preference€based€on€race,€colour,Š ZŖ Šdescent,€or€national€or€ethnic€origin€which€[had]€the€purpose€or€effect€of€nullifying€orŠ @ Šimpairing€the€recognition,€enjoyment,€or€exercise,€on€an€equal€footing,€of€human€rights€..."Š &v Š(article€1,€paragraph€1,€of€the€Convention).€There€is€said€to€be€no€evidence€that€the€author'sŠ  \ Šethnic€or€national€origin€was€a€factor€in€the€decision€of€the€LLC€to€refuse€a€permanentŠ ņB Šappointment€to€the€author;€rather,€he€was€concerned€to€fulfil€his€duty€to€ensure€that€theŠ Ų( Šoperations€of€the€casino€were€subject€to€constant€scrutiny€and€to€guarantee€public€confidenceŠ ¾ Šin€the€casino's€lawful€operation€and€management.€Š ¤ō ŠĢ4.7€Finally,€the€State€party€claims€that€the€author€failed€to€exhaust€available€domesticŠ p!Ą  Šremedies,€as€required€by€article€14,€paragraph€7€(a),€of€the€Convention,€and€that€he€had€twoŠ V"¦! Šavailable€and€effective€remedies€which€he€should€have€pursued€in€relation€to€his€allegationŠ <#Œ" Šof€unfair€dismissal.€Firstly,€it€would€have€been€open€to€the€author€to€challenge€the€decisionŠ "$r# Šof€the€President€of€the€HREOC€in€the€Federal€Court€of€Australia,€pursuant€to€theŠ %X $ ŠAdministrative€Decisions€(Judicial€Review)€Act€of€1977€(ADJR€Act).€The€State€partyŠ ī%>!% Šemphasizes€that€the€decision€of€the€HREOC€President€ņņwasóó€reviewable€under€the€ADJR€Act:Š Ō&$"& Šgrounds€for€review€are€listed€in€section€5€of€the€Act;€they€include€grounds€that€there€is€noŠ ŗ' #' Ševidence€or€other€material€to€justify€the€taking€of€the€decision,€and€that€the€adoption€of€theŠ  (š#( Šdecision€was€an€improper€exercise€of€power.€The€State€party€argues€that€this€reviewŠ †)Ö$) Šmechanism€is€both€available€and€effective€within€the€meaning€of€the€Committee'sŠ l*¼%* Šadmissibility€requirements:€thus,€pursuant€to€any€application€under€the€ADJR€Act,€the€CourtŠ R+¢&+ Šmay€set€aside€the€impugned€decision,€refer€it€back€to€the€first€instance€for€furtherŠ 8,ˆ', Šconsideration€subject€to€directions,€or€declare€the€rights€of€the€parties.€Š -n(- Š‡4.8€According€to€the€State€party,€the€author€could€also€have€challenged€the€LLC's€decisionŠ ° Šin€the€Supreme€Court€of€South€Australia,€by€seeking€judicial€review€under€Rule€98.01€of€theŠ –ę ŠSouth€Australian€Supreme€Court€Rules.€Under€Rule€98.01,€the€Supreme€Court€may€grant€aŠ |Ģ Šdeclaration€in€the€nature€of€ņņcertiorarióó€or€ņņmandamusóó.€Under€Rule€98.09,€the€Supreme€CourtŠ b² Šmay€award€damages€on€a€summons€for€judicial€review.€It€is€submitted€that€an€action€forŠ H˜ Šjudicial€review€pursuant€to€Rule€98€was€an€available€remedy€in€the€instant€case.€Š . ~ ŠĢ4.9€The€State€party€concedes€that€the€author€was€not€obliged€to€exhaust€local€remedies€whichŠ ś J Šare€ineffective€or€objectively€have€no€prospect€of€success.€It€refers€in€this€context€to€theŠ ą 0 Šdecision€of€the€Full€Court€of€the€Supreme€Court€of€South€Australia€in€the€case€of€ņņR.€v.Š Ę   ŠSeckler€ex€parte€Alvaroóó€("Alvaro's€case"),€decided€on€23€December€1986.€The€material€factsŠ ¬ ü  Šof€that€case€were€similar€to€the€author's:€the€respondent€was€the€LLC€of€South€Australia,€theŠ ’ā  Šsame€person€as€in€the€author's€case,€and€the€matter€at€issue€was€the€respondent's€refusal€toŠ xČ  Šapprove€the€plaintiff's€employment.€By€majority,€the€Supreme€Court€of€South€Australia€heldŠ ^®  Šthat€the€plaintiff€was€not€entitled€to€relief.€In€the€State€party's€opinion,€the€judicial€precedentŠ D”  Šprovided€by€the€decision€in€ņņAlvaro's€caseóó€did€not€excuse€the€author€from€exhausting€theŠ *z  Šremedy€available€by€way€of€judicial€review;€it€adds€that€"unlike€an€established€legal€doctrine,Š ` Ša€single€majority€judgment€in€a€relatively€new€area€of€law€does€not€meet€the€test€of€obviousŠ öF Šfutility€required€in€order€to€countenance€non„exhaustion€of€an€available€remedy".€Š Ü, ŠĢ4.10€Still€in€the€same€context,€the€State€party€rejects€as€too€broad€an€interpretation€theŠ Øų Šargument€that€exhaustion€of€domestic€remedies€cannot€be€required€if€the€remedies€availableŠ ŽŽ Šprobably€would€not€result€in€a€favourable€outcome.€Therefore,€judicial€review€under€RuleŠ tÄ Š98€of€the€Supreme€Court€Rules€is€said€to€be€both€an€available€and€an€effective€remedy,€toŠ ZŖ Šwhich€the€author€did€not€resort.€The€State€party€notes€that€the€author€did€not€file€his€claimŠ @ Šwithin€the€six€months€of€the€grounds€for€review€first€arising€(7€November€1987),€as€isŠ &v Šrequired€under€Rule€98.06€of€the€Supreme€Court€Rules.€Thus,€while€barred€from€pursuingŠ  \ Šthis€remedy€now€because€of€the€expiration€of€statutory€deadlines,€the€State€party€observesŠ ņB Šthat€failure€to€pursue€the€remedy€in€a€timely€manner€must€be€attributed€to€the€author.Š Ų( ŠReference€to€the€jurisprudence€of€the€Human€Rights€Committee€is€made.€Š ¾ ŠĢ5.1€In€comments€dated€28€April€1996,€the€author€rebuts€the€State€party's€arguments€andŠ Š Ś Šdismisses€them€as€irrelevant€to€the€solution€of€his€case.€He€questions€the€credibility€of€theŠ p!Ą  ŠState€party's€arguments€in€the€light€of€the€letters€of€support€he€received€from€a€Member€ofŠ V"¦! ŠParliament,€Mr.€Peter€Duncan.€Š <#Œ" ŠĢ5.2€In€the€author's€opinion,€the€Committee€ņņdoesóó€have€competence€to€deal€with€the€merits€ofŠ %X $ Šhis€claims.€He€contends€that€the€HREOC€did€not€examine€his€complaint€with€the€requisiteŠ ī%>!% Šprocedural€fairness.€In€this€context,€he€notes,€without€giving€further€explanations,€that€theŠ Ō&$"& ŠRDA€allows€complainants€to€attend€a€hearing€at€some€designated€location€to€presentŠ ŗ' #' Šarguments€in€support€of€the€complaint,€and€that€this€did€not€occur€in€his€case.€The€result,€heŠ  (š#( Šsurmises,€led€to€an€uninformed€decision€of€the€HREOC€which€was€not€compatible€with€theŠ †)Ö$) Šprovisions€of€the€Convention.€Š l*¼%* ŠĢ5.3€The€author€notes€that€the€President€of€the€HREOC,€Sir€Ronald€Wilson,€who€dismissedŠ 8,ˆ', Šhis€claim€on€21€March€1995,€had€been€a€judge€in€the€Supreme€Court€of€South€Australia€whenŠ -n(- Šthe€decision€in€ņņAlvaro's€caseóó€was€handed€down€in€December€1986.€He€now€argues€that€thereŠ ° Šwas€a€conflict€of€interest€on€the€part€of€the€President€of€the€HREOC,€who€had€determinedŠ –ę Šthe€merits€of€a€factually€comparable€case€in€the€Supreme€Court€of€South€Australia€beforeŠ |Ģ Šdealing€with€the€author's€own€case.€In€the€circumstances,€the€author€argues€that€the€decisionŠ b² Šof€the€HREOC€was€tainted€by€bias€and€arbitrariness€and€that€the€Committee€has€competenceŠ H˜ Što€deal€with€his€case.€Š . ~ ŠĢ5.4€The€author€reiterates€that€there€ņņisóó€sufficient€evidence€to€show€that€his€case€falls€primaŠ ś J Šfacie€within€the€scope€of€application€of€article€1,€paragraph€1,€of€the€Convention.€He€arguesŠ ą 0 Šthat€"[a]s€with€normal€practices€of€institutionalized€racism€a€clear€and€precise€reason€[forŠ Ę   Štermination€of€employment]€was€not€given€nor€required€to€be€given".€He€further€contendsŠ ¬ ü  Šthat€it€is€difficult€to€see€how€the€acts€of€State€agents€in€his€case€did€ņņnotóó€amount€to€aŠ ’ā  Š"distinction"€within€the€meaning€of€the€Convention,€given€the€terms€of€the€PoliceŠ xČ  ŠCommissioner's€report€to€the€LLC€from€1987,€where€it€was€explicitly€stated€that€the€authorŠ ^®  Šwas€"a€member€of€a€broad€family€group€...€All€are€of€Italian€extraction".€From€this€reasoning,Š D”  Šthe€author€asserts,€it€is€clear€that€individuals€with€his€background€are€precluded€fromŠ *z  Šenjoying€or€exercising€their€rights€on€an€equal€footing€with€other€members€of€theŠ ` Šcommunity.€He€also€refers€to€a€judgment€in€the€case€of€ņņMandala€and€Anor€v.€Dowell€Leeóó,Š öF Š((1983)€All€ER,€1062),€where€it€was€held€that€blatant€and€obviously€discriminatoryŠ Ü, Šstatements€are€generally€not€required€when€investigating€instances€of€race€distinctions,€sinceŠ Ā Šdirect€evidence€of€racial€bias€is€often€disguised.€Š Øų ŠĢ5.5€As€to€the€requirement€of€exhaustion€of€domestic€remedies,€the€author€observes€that€theŠ tÄ Šdecision€handed€down€by€the€President€of€the€HREOC€on€21€March€1995€and€transmittedŠ ZŖ Što€him€on€24€March€1995€failed€to€mention€any€possible€further€remedies.€He€notes€that€theŠ @ ŠRDA€itself€is€silent€on€the€possibility€of€judicial€review€of€decisions€adopted€by€the€PresidentŠ &v Šof€the€HREOC€by€the€Federal€Court€of€Australia.€Š  \ ŠĢ5.6€Finally,€the€author€contends€that€the€possibility€of€judicial€review€of€the€decision€of€theŠ Ų( ŠLLC€to€refuse€him€permanent€employment€under€the€rules€of€the€Supreme€Court€of€SouthŠ ¾ ŠAustralia€is€not€realistically€open€to€him.€He€argues€that€the€judgment€of€the€Supreme€CourtŠ ¤ō Šof€South€Australia€in€ņņAlvaro's€caseóó€ņņdoesóó€constitute€a€relevant€precedent€for€the€determinationŠ Š Ś Šof€his€own€case,€all€the€more€so€since€the€State€party€itself€acknowledges€that€ņņAlvaro's€caseóóŠ p!Ą  Špresented€many€similarities€to€the€author's.€If€adding€the€fact€that€the€President€of€theŠ V"¦! ŠHREOC€who€dismissed€the€author's€appeal€had€previously€been€involved€in€theŠ <#Œ" Šdetermination€of€ņņAlvaro's€caseóó,€the€author€adds,€then€the€possibility€of€challenging€hisŠ "$r# Šdecision€before€the€Supreme€Court€successfully€was€remote.€Š %X $ ŠĢ6.1€By€further€submission€of€22€July€1996,€the€State€party€in€turn€dismisses€as€partial€orŠ Ō&$"& Šincorrect€several€of€the€author's€comments.€It€notes€that€the€author€was€partial€in€choosingŠ ŗ' #' Šquotes€from€the€Police€Commissioner's€report€and€that€the€complete€quotes€indicate€that€theŠ  (š#( Šoperative€factor€in€the€LLC's€decision€concerning€Mr.€Barbaro's€suitability€for€casinoŠ †)Ö$) Šemployment€was€his€association€with€18€members€of€his€family€who€had€been€convicted€ofŠ l*¼%* Šmajor€drug„related€offences.€Ethnicity€was€only€raised€by€the€Police€Commissioner€as€oneŠ R+¢&+ Šfactor,€combined€with€others€such€as€family€association€and€the€type€of€offences;€the€author'sŠ 8,ˆ', Šethnic€background€was€relevant€only€in€so€far€as€it€assisted€in€defining€this€cluster€ofŠ -n(- Šassociations.€Š ° ŠĢ6.2€The€State€party€concedes€that€in€Australian€employment€practice,€associates€of€applicantsŠ |Ģ Šfor€employment€are€generally€not€considered€a€relevant€factor€in€the€determination€ofŠ b² Šsuitability€for€employment.€In€the€instant€case,€it€ņņwasóó€relevant€because€the€LLC€was€not€anŠ H˜ Šemployer€but€a€statutory€officer.€His€statutory€role€was€to€ensure€the€constant€scrutiny€ofŠ . ~ Šcasino€operations,€a€role€recognized€by€the€Supreme€Court€of€South€Australia€in€Alvaro'sŠ  d Šcase.€In€short,€the€LLC€was€entrusted€with€maintenance€of€the€internal€and€external€integrityŠ ś J Šof€the€casino.€Like€an€employer,€however,€he€was€subject€to€the€provisions€of€the€RDA€ofŠ ą 0 Š1975;€in€the€instant€case,€the€State€party€reiterates€that€the€fact€that€there€were€drug€offendersŠ Ę   Šin€the€author's€extended€family€was€a€proper€justification€for€the€LLC's€decision.€Š ¬ ü  ŠĢ6.3€The€State€party€agrees€in€principle€with€the€author's€assertion€that€obvious€and€blatantŠ xČ  Šexpressions€of€racial€discrimination€are€not€required€when€investigating€instances€of€raceŠ ^®  Šdistinctions.€It€notes€in€this€context€that€prohibition€of€indirectly€discriminatory€acts€orŠ D”  Šunintentionally€discriminatory€acts€is€an€established€principle€of€Australian€law.€However,Š *z  Šthe€State€party€re„emphasizes€that€decisions€in€Mr.€Barbaro's€case€rested€on€grounds€otherŠ ` Šthan€race,€colour,€descent€or€national€or€ethnic€origin.€Š öF ŠĢ6.4€The€State€party€contends€that€the€author's€comments€raise€new€allegations€about€theŠ Ā Šfairness€of€the€procedures€before€the€HREOC,€especially€as€regards€his€claim€that€he€wasŠ Øų Šdenied€due€process€since€he€was€not€afforded€an€opportunity€to€attend€a€hearing€to€presentŠ ŽŽ Šhis€complaint.€The€State€party€argues€that€the€author€did€not€exhaust€domestic€remedies€inŠ tÄ Šthis€respect€and€that€he€could€have€filed€an€application€for€judicial€review€of€this€allegationŠ ZŖ Šunder€the€ADJR.€In€any€event,€the€State€party€continues,€procedural€fairness€did€not€requireŠ @ Šthe€personal€attendance€of€Mr.€Barbaro€to€present€his€complaint.€In€the€case€of€the€HREOC,Š &v Šthe€grounds€for€dismissing€complaints€prior€to€conciliation€are€set€out€in€section€24€(2)€ofŠ  \ Šthe€RDA.€They€are:€Š ņB ŠĢ(a)€if€the€Race€Discrimination€Commissioner€is€satisfied€that€the€discriminatory€act€is€notŠ ¾ Šunlawful€by€reason€of€a€provision€of€the€RDA;€Š ¤ō ŠĢ(b)€if€the€Commissioner€is€of€the€opinion€that€the€aggrieved€person€does€not€desire€that€theŠ p!Ą  Šinquiry€be€made€or€continued;€Š V"¦! ŠĢ(c)€if€the€complaint€has€been€made€to€the€Commission€in€relation€to€an€act€which€occurredŠ "$r# Šmore€than€12€months€prior€to€the€filing€of€the€claim;€Š %X $ ŠĢ(d)€if€the€Commissioner€is€of€the€opinion€that€the€complaint€under€consideration€is€frivolous,Š Ō&$"& Švexatious,€misconceived€or€lacking€in€substance.€Š ŗ' #' ŠĢIn€the€author's€case,€the€President€of€the€HREOC€dismissed€the€complaint€on€the€basis€ofŠ †)Ö$) Šsection€24€(2)€(d)€of€the€RDA.€Š l*¼%* ŠĢ6.5€The€State€party€dismisses€as€totally€unfounded€the€author's€argument€that€the€decisionŠ 8,ˆ', Šof€the€HREOC€was€biased€because€of€an€alleged€conflict€of€interest€on€the€part€of€theŠ -n(- ŠPresident€of€the€HREOC.€The€State€party€points€to€the€long„standing€involvement€of€theŠ ° ŠPresident€of€the€HREOC€in€the€legal€profession€and€adds€that€for€someone€with€the€profileŠ –ę Šand€the€background€of€the€President€of€the€HREOC,€it€is€indeed€likely€that€he€will€considerŠ |Ģ Šat€different€times€issues€which€are€related€in€law€or€in€fact.€The€State€party€emphasizes€thatŠ b² Ša€previous€encounter€with€a€similar€(factual€or€legal)€issue€does€not€result€in€a€conflict€ofŠ H˜ Šinterest.€Further€evidence€of€bias€is€required,€which€the€author€has€patently€failed€to€provide.€Š . ~ ŠĢ6.6€As€to€Mr.€Barbaro's€contention€that€he€was€not€informed€of€the€availability€of€domesticŠ ś J Šremedies€after€the€HREOC's€decision€of€21€March€1995,€the€State€party€notes€that€neitherŠ ą 0 Šthe€Convention€nor€the€Australian€RDA€of€1975€impose€an€obligation€to€indicate€allŠ Ę   Šavailable€appellate€mechanisms€to€a€complainant.€Š ¬ ü  ŠĢ6.7€Finally,€concerning€the€letters€of€support€sent€to€the€HREOC€on€the€author's€behalf€byŠ xČ  Ša€Member€of€Parliament,€Mr.€Peter€Duncan,€formerly€a€parliamentary€secretary€to€theŠ ^®  ŠAttorney„General,€the€State€party€recalls€that€Federal€Parliamentarians€frequently€write€toŠ D”  Šthe€HREOC€on€behalf€of€their€constituents,€advocating€the€rights€of€their€constituents€in€theirŠ *z  Šrole€as€democratically€elected€representatives.€The€State€party€contends€that€this€role€mustŠ ` Šbe€distinguished€from€both€the€investigative€role€of€the€independent€HREOC€and€theŠ öF Šexecutive€role€of€the€parliamentary€secretary€to€the€Attorney„General.€In€the€instant€case,€itŠ Ü, Šwas€clear€that€the€M.€P.€acted€on€the€author's€behalf€in€his€representative€role.€MoreŠ Ā Šimportantly,€the€purpose€of€the€letters€was€to€urge€a€thorough€investigation€of€the€author'sŠ Øų Šcomplaints€by€the€HREOC.€Once€a€final€decision€in€the€case€had€been€taken,€Mr.€DuncanŠ ŽŽ Šdid€not€write€again.€Š tÄ ŠĢ7.€During€its€forty„ninth€session,€in€August€1996,€the€Committee€considered€theŠ @ Šcommunication€but€concluded€that€further€information€from€the€State€party€was€requiredŠ &v Šbefore€an€informed€decision€on€admissibility€could€be€adopted.€Accordingly,€the€State€partyŠ  \ Šwas€requested€to€clarify:€Š ņB ŠĢ(a)€whether€the€author€would€have€had€the€opportunity,€in€the€event€that€complaints€underŠ ¾ Šthe€Administrative€Decisions€(Judicial€Review)€Act€and€pursuant€to€Rule€98.01€of€the€RulesŠ ¤ō Šof€the€Supreme€Court€of€South€Australia€had€been€dismissed,€to€appeal€further€to€the€FederalŠ Š Ś ŠCourt€of€Australia,€or€whether€he€could€have€complained€directly€to€the€Federal€Court€ofŠ p!Ą  ŠAustralia;€Š V"¦! ŠĢ(b)€whether€the€State€party€consistently€does,€or€does€not,€inform€individuals€in€the€author'sŠ "$r# Šsituation€of€the€availability€of€judicial€remedies€in€their€cases.€Š %X $ ŠĢ8.1€In€reply,€the€State€party€notes€that€Mr.€Barbaro€would€have€had€the€opportunity€to€appealŠ Ō&$"& Što€the€Federal€Court€of€Australia€and€subsequently€the€High€Court€of€Australia€in€the€eventŠ ŗ' #' Šthat€a€complaint€under€the€ADJR€Act€had€been€dismissed.€Under€section€8,€the€Federal€CourtŠ  (š#( Šof€Australia€has€jurisdiction€to€hear€applications€under€the€ADJR€Act;€applications€may€beŠ †)Ö$) Šfiled€in€respect€of€decisions€to€which€the€Act€applies,€and€decisions€of€the€President€of€theŠ l*¼%* ŠHREOC€fall€within€the€definition€of€"decision(s)€to€which€this€Act€applies"€(section€3€(1)).Š R+¢&+ ŠThe€author€thus€had€the€right€to€seek€judicial€review€of€the€President's€decision€before€aŠ 8,ˆ', Šsingle€judge€of€the€Federal€Court€of€Australia€on€any€of€the€grounds€listed€in€section€5€of€theŠ -n(- ŠADJR€Act€relevant€to€his€case,€within€28€days€of€the€decision€of€the€HREOC€President.€IfŠ ° Šan€application€before€a€single€Federal€Court€judge€had€been€unsuccessful,€the€author€wouldŠ –ę Šhave€had€the€right€to€seek€leave€to€appeal€to€the€full€Federal€Court.€Š |Ģ ŠĢ8.2€If€unsuccessful€in€the€full€Federal€Court€of€Australia€application,€the€author€would€haveŠ H˜ Šbeen€further€entitled€to€seek€special€leave€to€appeal€to€the€High€Court€of€Australia€underŠ . ~ ŠOrder€69A€of€the€High€Court€Rules;€criteria€for€granting€special€leave€to€appeal€are€listedŠ  d Šin€section€35A€of€the€federal€Judiciary€Act€1903.€If€special€leave€to€appeal€were€granted,€aŠ ś J Šthree„week€period€from€the€granting€of€special€leave€to€appeal€would€apply€for€the€filing€ofŠ ą 0 Šthe€notice€of€appeal.€Š Ę   ŠĢ8.3€The€State€party€further€notes€that€the€author€would€have€had€an€opportunity€to€appeal€toŠ ’ā  Šthe€full€court€of€the€Supreme€Court€of€South€Australia€and€thereafter€the€High€Court€ofŠ xČ  ŠAustralia€if€a€complaint€under€Rule€98.01€of€the€Rules€of€the€Supreme€Court€of€SouthŠ ^®  ŠAustralia€had€been€dismissed€by€a€single€judge€(section€50€of€the€Supreme€Court€Act,€1935Š D”  Š(South€Australia)).€Mr.€Barbaro€would€have€had€to€lodge€an€appeal€within€14€days€of€theŠ *z  Šsingle€judge's€decision.€If€an€appeal€to€the€full€court€of€South€Australia€had€beenŠ ` Šunsuccessful,€Mr.€Barbaro€could€have€sought€special€leave€from€the€High€Court€of€AustraliaŠ öF Što€appeal€against€the€decision€of€the€full€court€of€the€Supreme€Court€of€South€AustraliaŠ Ü, Špursuant€to€section€35€of€the€Federal€Judiciary€Act,€1903.€Š Ā ŠĢ8.4€The€State€party€reiterates€that€the€Convention€does€not€impose€an€obligation€to€indicateŠ ŽŽ Šall€available€appeal€mechanisms€to€a€complainant.€There€is€no€statutory€obligation€to€provideŠ tÄ Šindividuals€with€information€about€possible€judicial€remedies€under€federal€or€SouthŠ ZŖ ŠAustralian€law;€nor€is€it€the€practice€of€the€federal€Government€or€the€Government€of€SouthŠ @ ŠAustralia€to€advise€individuals€about€possible€appeal€rights.€There€are,€however,€someŠ &v Šobligations€to€inform€individuals€of€their€appeal€rights:€thus,€under€the€federal€RaceŠ  \ ŠDiscrimination€Act,€1975,€where€the€Race€Discrimination€Commissioner€decides€not€toŠ ņB Šenquire€into€an€action€in€respect€of€which€a€complaint€was€filed,€he€or€she€must€inform€theŠ Ų( Šcomplainant€for€that€decision,€of€the€ņņratio€decidendióó€and€of€the€complainant's€rights€to€haveŠ ¾ Šthis€decision€reviewed€by€the€HREOC€President€(section€24€(3)).€In€Mr.€Barbaro's€case,€thisŠ ¤ō Šobligation€was€met.€It€is,€moreover,€the€practice€of€the€HREOC€to€advise€verbally€anyŠ Š Ś Šcomplainant€who€has€manifested€a€desire€to€challenge€a€decision€of€the€Commission'sŠ p!Ą  Špresident€of€other€avenues€of€appeal.€There€is€no€evidence€that€the€HREOC€deviated€fromŠ V"¦! Šthis€practice€in€the€author's€case.€Š <#Œ" ŠĢ8.5€The€State€party€notes€that€Mr.€Barbaro€does€not€appear€to€have€sought€legal€advice€onŠ %X $ Šappeals€and€remedies€available€to€him;€it€adds€that€it€is€common€knowledge€that€a€systemŠ ī%>!% Šof€publicly€funded€legal€aid€exists€in€Australia,€as€well€as€a€national€network€of€CommunityŠ Ō&$"& ŠLegal€Centres,€including€in€South€Australia.€Both€Legal€Aid€and€Community€Legal€CentresŠ ŗ' #' Šwould€have€provided€free€legal€advice€about€possible€appeal€mechanisms€to€individuals€inŠ  (š#( Šthe€author's€situation.€Mr.€Barbaro's€failure€to€avail€himself€of€such€free€legal€advice€cannotŠ †)Ö$) Šbe€attributed€to€the€State€party;€reference€is€made€to€the€Committee's€jurisprudence€that€itŠ l*¼%* Šis€the€author's€own€responsibility€to€exhaust€domestic€remedies.ņņaóó€Š R+¢&+ ŠĢ9.1€In€his€comments,€the€author€concedes€that€the€Race€Discrimination€CommissionerŠ -n(- Šinformed€him€of€his€right€of€review€of€her€decision€under€section€24AA€(1)€of€the€RaceŠ ° ŠDiscrimination€Act.€He€submits,€however,€that€the€President€of€the€HREOC€did€not€informŠ –ę Šhim€of€the€possibilities€of€any€avenues€of€appeal€against€his€decision€communicated€to€theŠ |Ģ Šauthor€on€24€March€1995;€he€contends€that€the€HREOC€President,€a€former€High€CourtŠ b² Šjudge,€should€have€informed€him€of€possible€remedies.€Mr.€Barbaro€adds€that,€as€a€layman,Š H˜ Šhe€could€not€have€been€aware€of€any€other€possible€judicial€remedies€against€the€decisionŠ . ~ Šof€the€HREOC€President.€Š  d ŠĢ9.2€The€author€reaffirms€that€an€application€to€the€Supreme€Court€of€South€Australia€underŠ ą 0 ŠRule€98.01€of€the€Court's€Rules€would€have€been€futile,€given€the€Supreme€Court's€earlierŠ Ę   Šjudgment€in€ņņAlvaro's€caseóó.€Š ¬ ü  ŠĢ9.3€Finally,€with€regard€to€the€State€party's€reference€to€the€availability€of€legal€advice€fromŠ xČ  ŠCommunity€Legal€Centres,€Mr.€Barbaro€submits€that€"such€assistance€is€only€available€inŠ ^®  Šextreme€situations€and€...€only€of€the€matter€involves€an€indictable€offence".€Š D”  ŠĢņņIssues€and€proceedings€before€the€Committeeóó€Š ` ŠĢ10.1€Before€considering€any€claims€contained€in€a€communication,€the€Committee€on€theŠ Ü, ŠElimination€of€Racial€Discrimination€must€decide,€pursuant€to€article€14,€paragraph€7€(a),Š Ā Šof€the€Convention,€whether€or€not€the€case€is€admissible.€Š Øų ŠĢ10.2€The€State€party€contends€that€the€author's€claims€are€inadmissible€on€the€basis€of€failureŠ tÄ Što€substantiate€the€racially€discriminatory€nature€of€the€LLC's€decision€of€May€1987.€TheŠ ZŖ ŠCommittee€notes€that€the€author€has€made€specific€allegations,€notably€in€so€far€as€theyŠ @ Šrelate€to€passages€in€the€report€of€the€Police€Commissioner€of€South€Australia€which€hadŠ &v Šbeen€made€available€to€the€LLC,€to€support€his€contention€that€his€national€and/or€ethnicŠ  \ Šbackground€influenced€the€decision€of€the€LLC.€In€the€Committee's€opinion,€the€author€hasŠ ņB Šsufficiently€substantiated,€for€purposes€of€admissibility,€his€claims€under€article€5€(a)€and€(e)Š Ų( Š(i),€read€together€with€article€1,€paragraph€1,€of€the€Convention.€Š ¾ ŠĢ10.3€The€State€party€has€also€claimed€that€the€author€has€failed€to€exhaust€domestic€remediesŠ Š Ś Šwhich€were€both€available€and€effective,€since€he€could€have€challenged€the€decision€of€theŠ p!Ą  ŠPresident€of€the€HREOC€under€the€Administrative€Decisions€(Judicial€Review)€Act,€and€theŠ V"¦! Šdecision€of€the€LLC€pursuant€to€Rule€98.01€of€the€Rules€of€the€Supreme€Court€of€SouthŠ <#Œ" ŠAustralia.€The€author€has€replied€that€(a)€he€was€not€informed€of€the€availability€of€thoseŠ "$r# Šremedies,€and€(b)€that€the€precedent€established€by€the€judgment€in€ņņAlvaro's€caseóó€would€haveŠ %X $ Šmade€an€appeal€to€the€Supreme€Court€of€South€Australia€futile.€Š ī%>!% ŠĢ10.4€The€Committee€begins€by€noting€that€the€author€ņņwasóó€legally€represented€during€theŠ ŗ' #' Šhearing€before€the€LLC€on€30€April€1987.€It€would€have€been€incumbent€upon€his€legalŠ  (š#( Šrepresentative€to€inform€him€of€possible€avenues€of€appeal€after€the€LLC's€decision€toŠ †)Ö$) Šterminate€the€author's€employment.€That€the€author€was€not€informed€of€potential€judicialŠ l*¼%* Šremedies€by€the€judicial€authorities€of€South€Australia€did€not€absolve€him€from€seeking€toŠ R+¢&+ Špursue€avenues€of€judicial€redress;€nor€can€the€impossibility€to€do€so€now,€after€expirationŠ 8,ˆ', Šof€statutory€deadlines€for€the€filing€of€appeals,€be€attributed€to€the€State€party.€Ō_ŌŠ -n(- Š‡10.5€The€Committee€further€does€not€consider€that€the€judgment€of€the€Supreme€Court€ofŠ ° ŠSouth€Australia€in€ņņAlvaro's€caseóó€was€necessarily€Ō_ŌdispositiveŌ_Ō€of€the€author's€own€case.€Firstly,Š –ę Šthe€judgment€in€ņņAlvaro's€caseóó€was€a€majority€and€not€a€unanimous€judgment.€Secondly,€theŠ |Ģ Šjudgment€was€delivered€in€respect€of€legal€issues€which€were,€as€the€State€party€points€out,Š b² Šlargely€uncharted.€In€the€circumstances,€the€existence€of€one€judgment,€albeit€on€issuesŠ H˜ Šsimilar€to€those€in€the€author's€case,€did€not€absolve€Mr.€Ō_ŌBarbaroŌ_Ō€from€attempting€to€availŠ . ~ Šhimself€of€the€remedy€under€Rule€98.01€of€the€Supreme€Court€Rules.€Finally,€even€if€thatŠ  d Šrecourse€had€failed,€it€would€have€been€open€to€the€author€to€appeal€to€Federal€courtŠ ś J Šinstances.€In€the€circumstances,€the€Committee€concludes€that€the€author€has€failed€to€meetŠ ą 0 Šthe€requirements€of€article€14,€paragraph€7€(a),€of€the€Convention.€Š Ę   ŠĢ11.€The€Committee€on€the€Elimination€of€Racial€Discrimination€therefore€decides:€Š ’ā  ŠĢ(a)€that€the€communication€is€inadmissible;€Š ^®  ŠĢ(b)€that€this€decision€shall€be€communicated€to€the€State€party€and€to€the€author.€Š *z  ŠĢŠ ŠņņNotesóóŠ Ü, ŠĢĢa/€€See€decision€on€communication€No.€5/1994€(ņņC.€P.€and€his€son€v.€Denmarkóó),€para.€6.2,€inŠ ŽŽ ŠņņOfficial€Records€of€the€General€Assembly,€Fiftieth€Session,€Supplement€No.€18óó€(A/50/18),Š tÄ Šannex€VIII.€Š ZŖ ŠÓÓ