WPC   RFE[7cVy^m"% bBRn.*cA>1c"rWOؖ.MB [$T 8U4 Gftg1[Bje'*b[eiMo.~~_ZlQ>V5QmE ojdxePD bѲ-(T\,k.e0D v#/|zgDЀ},` @ގ Ã[O(FTaHlRrcW:|nQљA7M hAڶC*S&`C4u-R&hg`@腑x6A|{s_BmHbVM|li= &C'Ms >`f"|p ;Cͭ1<;I?}j 4DrXmzx .{F34b* G#l KˡX$╕:YP"U>l 0v 0<+ 0Yg 0_ 0i 0N 0( D+G AMr  0 #! UN % M ( N& ^ ( w44 4h | m~ \  `&Times New Roman' A. E. v. Switzerland, Committee against Torture, Communication No. 24/1995, U.N. Doc. A/504/1995, U.N. Doc. A/50"Angie Dituri"0Angie Dituri .   6F , 4Heading 3 S p^S   XXX p^S<:Default Para64Hyperlink    <:FollowedHype    < :Normal (Web) S =jS =jSӁ Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5(2,$ !..      XBXXXXBXXXB  ($'dxd A<< c#|x($..      X*OXXXX*OXXX*OHP LaserJet 4000 Series PS0(hH  Z6Times New Roman RegularX4)-DUU[Das()rtyBar\{U !..      XBXXXXBXXXB  _ COMMITTEEAGAINSTTORTURE  A.E.v.Switzerland  CommunicationNo.24/19952May1995U.N.Doc.A/50/44at74(1995)ADMISSIBILITY   L  Submittedby:A.E.[namedeleted][representedbycounsel]   S'  S    Allegedvictim:Theauthor   S\ S    Stateparty:Switzerland p S4 S    Dateofcommunication:20February1995 H     TheCommitteeagainstTorture,establishedunderarticle17oftheConventionagainst  \ TortureandOtherCruel,InhumanorDegradingTreatmentorPunishment,S_  S    Meetingon2May1995,   S7 S    Adoptsthefollowing:    " Decisiononadmissibility  l S X  S      1.TheauthorofthecommunicationisaNigeriancitizen,bornin1972,whoenteredSwitzerlandfromItalyin1994,andwhohasbeenorderedtoleavethecountryfollowingthedismissalofhisapplicationforrefugeestatus.TheauthorclaimsthathisreturntoNigeriawouldmakehimavictimofaviolationofarticle3oftheConventionagainstTorturebySwitzerland.S3&!%0! S     2.Beforeconsideringanyclaimscontainedinacommunication,theCommitteeagainstTorturemustdecidewhetherornotitisadmissibleunderarticle22oftheConvention.S(G$(# S  Q   3.Theauthor'srequestforrecognitionasarefugeewasrefusedon20May1994.Hisappealagainstthisdecisionwasdismissedon5October1994.On8December1994,theauthorrequestedreviewofthedecisiononthebasisofnewdocumentaryevidence,butdeclinedtopursuetheremedybecausehefoundthecoststoohighanddoubtedthathewouldbe @-(, successful.SS S  k   4.Article22,paragraph5(b),oftheConventionprecludestheCommitteefromconsideringanycommunicationfromanindividual,unlessithasascertainedthattheindividualhasexhaustedallavailabledomesticremedies;thisruledoesnotapplyifitisestablishedthattheapplicationofdomesticremedieshasbeenorwouldbeunreasonablyprolongedorwouldbeunlikelytobringeffectiverelief.Inthecircumstancesofthiscase,theCommitteefindsthattheStatepartyshouldhaveanopportunitytoevaluatethenewevidencebeforethecommunicationissubmittedforexaminationunderarticle22oftheConvention.Moreover,onthebasisoftheinformationavailable,theCommitteecannotconcludethatthefeerequiredpreventedtheauthorfromexhaustingtheremedyorthatthereviewwouldbe a  8  priori ineffective. (  S? <  S  Z  5.TheCommitteethereforedecides:Sg   S    (a)Thatthecommunicationisinadmissible;S?   S    (b)Thatthisdecisionshallbecommunicatedtotheauthorand,forinformation,totheStateparty.S` S    [DoneinEnglish,French,RussianandSpanish,theEnglishtextbeingtheoriginalversion.]P