ÿWPC  €LàDi¤É’(\Ùّ͌u|~µê(.`þ¨‰Õ€2 ¹èHÍÆ?>€»Lf ÂþöíGwÞþw–¨sNÚX*±)yÚæ3©ÞŠ<%jz"’ÿ”¢Qµ, —ç :ÓÞ¥ŠLÉ¡Eg ƒîÈžÛñ‡RAÌ9 yíÙŸÃõ­‰f ÉHò•-Š½®Äxè¡Œÿ(Œ7+©1Ô‡˜½X–ªnT¶¸Î&tC—ÕõÁ¨¬D»^=õT¾¿d;Y,FðLæ\cýñአZ¶8S1·Ÿ*xÃÓy R 9DÂöwª#ŠÝøú6Ê@vü nãýŒ=jkÈ«$;Ž%Ù°D¥>ð3刟jTÛB3þ9ÐvQ´¼©(…Œæè1:ç4$äÞ½½M ü¯=y®8Àï¥ÞlãЛÁ>ž·aÔö+€ŽÙÜÍ:/Þ³„ &˜á5=Âxa0ݺ÷àþYš~DéÝCªGôîkO›ÙD>%pñE³Ó u•\0¿Ù-=jT!$þ¡¿º;ëlK0ÅO{6¹‡Û«¨ÙfW¥š¦št@GÖ¾æ"×ÜY'>ÁAr$` |LA®!5*[uÛ[WdùÅ"66‰ÕC>U>BÌ€ 0nL 0iº 0Y# 0_| 0&ÛU6 %7 = 0ÆM #Á UNÔ Ô M" (& NN ^ P w\ 4` t mv ô\  `‹&Times New Roman' United Nations Human Rights Website - Treaty Bodies Database - Document - Jurisprudence - 4nt - Jurisprudence - "Angie Dituri"0Angie Dituri .   <ÿÿ:Default ParaÔ€ôôôÔÔ€XXXÔ< ÿÿ:Normal (Web)Ô S ÔÓ =jSÓÓ =jSÓ6ÿÿ4HyperlinkóóòòÔ ÿ ÔóóÔ  Ô<ÿÿ:FollowedHypeóóòòÔ  ÔóóÔ  Ô<qyÿÿ:HTML TypewriÔ€ôôôÔÔK€<þ6X9`(‹Courier NewKÔÔ  ÔÔ€XXXÔÔS€ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔÔ  Ô<þ6X9`(‹Courier New X#|x(žå³$¡¡ÒÜ°ÒÒÜ°ÒÔ..ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ€ XyÀXX XÔÔ€XyÀXX XyÀÔÔÔ˜HP LaserJet 6P/6MP - Standard,ä,,,,,ä0(ÈhH  Z‹6Times New Roman RegularV•ô* Äpì*T3OREÄРÿU‹ÿÀÀÀÝ ƒ å³!ÝÒÜ°ÒÒÜ°ÒÔ..ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ€ Xa˜XX XÔÔ€Xa˜XX Xa˜ÔÔÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôò òHUMAN€RIGHTS€COMMITTEEÐ ° ÐòòÌÔ_ÔSchlosserÔ_Ô€Ô_Ôv.Ô_Ô€Czech€RepublicóóÐ |Ì ÐÌCommunication€No€670/1995€**Ð H˜ ÐÌ21€October€1998Ð  d ÐÌÔ_ÔCCPRÔ_Ô/C/64/D/670/1995*€Ð à 0 ÐÌÌADMISSIBILITYó óÐ ’â  ÐÌÌòòòòSubmitted€byóó:€Ô_ÔRuedigerÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔSchlosserÔ_Ô€(represented€by€Ô_ÔLeewogÔ_Ô€and€Ô_ÔGronesÔ_Ô,€a€law€firm€inÐ D”  ÐÔ_ÔMayenÔ_Ô,€Germany)€Ð *z  ÐÌòòVictimóó:€The€author€Ð öF ÐÌòòState€partyóó:€Czech€Republic€Ð  ÐÌòòDate€of€communicationóó:€5€October€1995€óóÐ ŽÞ ÐÌÌòòThe€Human€Rights€Committeeóó,€established€under€article€28€of€the€International€CovenantÐ @ Ðon€Civil€and€Political€Rights,€Ð &v ÐÌòòMeeting€onóó€21€October€1998€Ð òB ÐÌòòAdopts€the€followingóó:€Ð ¾ ÐÌÌÓ  Óòòò òDecision€on€admissibilityó óóóÐ p!À  ÐÌÓ  ÓÓ  Ó1.€The€author€of€the€communication€is€Ô_ÔRuedigerÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔSchlosserÔ_Ô,€a€German€citizen€residing€inÐ <#Œ" ÐÔ_ÔTretowÔ_Ô,€Germany€(Province€of€Brandenburg,€former€German€Democratic€Republic).€Mr.Ð "$r# ÐÔ_ÔSchlosserÔ_Ô€claims€to€be€a€victim€of€violations€of€articles€12,€14,€26€and€27€of€the€InternationalÐ %X $ ÐCovenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights€by€the€Czech€Republic.€He€is€represented€by€Ô_ÔLeewogÔ_ÔÐ î%>!% Ðand€Ô_ÔGronesÔ_Ô,€a€law€firm€in€Ô_ÔMayenÔ_Ô,€Germany.€The€Covenant€entered€into€force€forÐ Ô&$"& ÐCzechoslovakia€on€23€March€1976,€the€Optional€Protocol€on€12€June€1991.òò€1óóÐ º' #' ÐÌòòThe€facts€as€submitted€by€the€authoróó€Ð †)Ö$) ÐÌ2.1€Mr.€Ô_ÔSchlosserÔ_Ô€was€born€a€citizen€of€Czechoslovakia€on€7€June€1932€in€Ô_ÔAussigÔ_Ô€(today€Ô_ÔUstiÔ_ÔÐ R+¢&+ ÐÔ_ÔnadÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔLabemÔ_Ô),€in€what€was€then€known€as€Ô_ÔSudetenlandÔ_Ô.€This€territory€had€been€part€of€theÐ 8,ˆ', ÐAustrian€Empire€until€November€1918,€when€it€became€part€of€the€new€State€ofÐ -n(- ÐCzechoslovakia.€In€October€1938,€the€territory€became€part€of€Germany€by€virtue€of€theÐ ° ÐMunich€Agreement,€and€at€the€end€of€the€Second€World€War€in€May€1945€it€was€restoredÐ –æ Ðto€Czechoslovakia.€Since€1€January€1993€it€forms€part€of€the€Czech€Republic.€Ð |Ì ÐÌ2.2€The€author€states€that€in€1945€he€as€well€as€his€parents€were€deprived€of€CzechoslovakÐ H˜ Ðcitizenship€by€virtue€of€the€Ô_ÔBenesÔ_Ô€Decree€No.€33€of€2€August€1945€on€the€Determination€ofÐ . ~ ÐCzechoslovak€citizenship€of€persons€belonging€to€the€German€and€Hungarian€Ethnic€Groups.€Ð  d ÐÌ2.3€Mr.€Ô_ÔSchlosserÔ_Ô€and€his€family€were€subjected€to€collective€exile,€together€with€otherÐ à 0 Ðmembers€of€the€German€ethnic€group€of€Ô_ÔAussigÔ_Ô,€who€were€expelled€to€Ô_ÔSaxoniaÔ_Ô€in€the€thenÐ Æ   ÐSoviet€occupation€zone€of€Germany€on€20€July€1945.€He€claims€that€this€expulsion€was€inÐ ¬ ü  Ðviolation€of€international€law,€since€it€was€based€on€ethnic€and€linguistic€discrimination.€Mr.Ð ’â  ÐÔ_ÔSchlosserÔ_Ô's€father€Franz,€who€died€in€1967,€was€an€antifascist€and€member€of€the€SocialÐ xÈ  ÐDemocratic€party.€He€had€been€a€businessman€in€the€construction€industry€and€owned€twoÐ ^®  Ðhouses€and€several€pieces€of€real€estate,€which€were€confiscated€by€virtue€of€Ô_ÔBenesÔ_Ô€DecreesÐ D”  ÐNo.€12/1945€of€21€June€1945€and€No.€108/1945€of€25€October€1945.€The€author€submits€theÐ *z  Ðtext€of€the€decrees€and€a€copy€of€the€relevant€pages€from€the€registry€book€of€Ô_ÔChabaroviceÔ_Ô,Ð ` ÐÔ_ÔUstiÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔnadÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔLabemÔ_Ô,€which€show€that€the€property€was€confiscated€pursuant€to€the€BenesÐ öF ÐDecrees.€Ð Ü, ÐÌòòThe€complaintóó€Ð ¨ø ÐÌ3.1€The€author€complains€of€a€continued€violation€of€his€rights€to€enter€his€own€country,€toÐ tÄ Ðequality€before€the€courts,€to€non„discrimination€and€to€the€enjoyment€of€minority€rights.Ð Zª ÐThe€continuing€violation€has€been€renewed€by€the€judgement€of€8€March€1995€of€theÐ @ ÐConstitutional€Court€of€the€Czech€Republic,€which€reaffirms€the€continued€validity€of€theÐ &v ÐÔ_ÔBenesÔ_Ô€Decrees,€which€were€applied€to€the€author€and€his€family.€The€validity€of€the€Ô_ÔBenesÔ_ÔÐ  \ ÐDecrees€has€been€repeatedly€confirmed€by€Czech€authorities,€including€the€Czech€PrimeÐ òB ÐMinister,€Ô_ÔVaclavÔ_Ô€Klaus,€on€23€August€1995.€Ð Ø( ÐÌ3.2€Mr.€Ô_ÔSchlosserÔ_Ô€claims€that€over€the€past€decades€he€has€been€deprived€of€the€rightÐ ¤ô Ðenunciated€in€article€12,€paragraph€4,€of€the€Covenant,€that€is€to€return€to€his€homeland€andÐ Š Ú Ðsettle€there,€where€his€parents€and€grandparents€were€born€and€where€his€ancestors€areÐ p!À  Ðburied.€Moreover,€he€claims€that€he€has€been€deprived€of€the€right€to€exercise€his€culturalÐ V"¦! Ðrights,€in€community€with€other€members€of€the€German€ethnic€group,€to€worship€in€theÐ <#Œ" Ðchurches€of€his€ancestors€and€to€live€in€the€land€where€he€was€born€and€where€he€grew€up.Ð "$r# ÐIn€this€context€he€also€invokes€the€right€to€return€enunciated€by€the€United€Nations€SecurityÐ %X $ ÐCouncil€with€regard€to€Ô_ÔexpelleesÔ_Ô€and€refugees€from€Bosnia,€Croatia€and€Serbia€(SecurityÐ î%>!% ÐCouncil€Resolutions€Nos.€941/1994,€947/1994,€981/1995€and€1009/1995).€Ð Ô&$"& ÐÌ3.3€With€regard€to€the€exercise€of€his€minority€rights€in€his€homeland,€Mr.€Ô_ÔSchlosserÔ_Ô€pointsÐ  (ð#( Ðout€that€no€State€is€allowed€to€frustrate€the€exercise€of€the€rights€of€its€subjects€by€deprivingÐ †)Ö$) Ðthem€of€citizenship€and€expelling€them.€Ð l*¼%* ÐÌ3.4€Mr.€Ô_ÔSchlosserÔ_Ô€specifically€complains€of€the€denial€of€equality€before€the€courts,€inÐ 8,ˆ', Ðviolation€of€article€14,€and€of€discrimination,€in€violation€of€article€26.€He€points€out€that€theÐ -n(- ÐÔ_Ôenforced€expatriation€in€1945,€the€expropriations€and€the€expulsions€were€carried€out€in€aÐ ° Ðcollective€way,€and€were€not€based€on€conduct€but€rather€on€status.€All€members€of€theÐ –æ ÐGerman€minority,€including€Social€Democrats€and€other€antifascists€were€expelled€and€theirÐ |Ì Ðproperty€was€confiscated,€just€because€they€were€German;€none€of€them€were€given€theÐ b² Ðopportunity€of€having€their€rights€determined€by€a€court€of€law.€In€this€context€he€refers€toÐ H˜ Ðthe€policy€of€ethnic€cleansing€in€the€former€Yugoslavia,€which€has€been€recognized€to€be€inÐ . ~ Ðviolation€of€international€law.€He€also€refers€to€the€Nazi€expatriation€and€expropriation€ofÐ  d ÐGerman€Jews,€which€were€arbitrary€and€discriminatory.€He€points€out€that€while€Nazi€lawsÐ ú J Ðhave€been€abrogated€and€restitution€or€compensation€has€been€effected€for€Nazi€crimes,Ð à 0 Ðneither€Czechoslovakia€nor€the€Czech€Republic€has€offered€restitution€or€compensation€toÐ Æ   Ðthe€expatriated,€expropriated€and€expelled€German€minority.€Ð ¬ ü  ÐÌ3.5€Mr.€Ô_ÔSchlosserÔ_Ô€notes€that€by€virtue€of€Law€No.€87/1991€Czech€citizens€with€CzechÐ xÈ  Ðresidence€may€obtain€restitution€or€compensation€for€properties€that€were€confiscated€by€theÐ ^®  ÐGovernment€of€Czechoslovakia€in€the€period€from€1948€to€1989.€Mr.€Ô_ÔSchlosserÔ_Ô€and€hisÐ D”  Ðfamily€do€not€qualify€for€compensation€under€this€law,€because€their€properties€wereÐ *z  Ðconfiscated€in€1945,€and€because€they€lost€their€Czech€citizenship€as€a€result€of€Ô_ÔBenesÔ_ÔÐ ` ÐDecree€No.€33€and€their€residence€because€of€their€expulsion.€Moreover,€he€points€out€thatÐ öF Ðwhereas€there€is€a€restitution€and€compensation€law€for€Czechs,€none€has€been€enacted€toÐ Ü, Ðallow€any€form€of€restitution€or€compensation€for€the€German€minority.€This€is€said€toÐ Â Ðconstitute€a€violation€of€article€26€of€the€Covenant.€Ð ¨ø ÐÌ3.6€With€regard€to€the€application€of€the€Covenant€to€the€facts€of€his€case,€Mr.€Ô_ÔSchlosserÔ_ÔÐ tÄ Ðpoints€out€that€although€the€Ô_ÔBenesÔ_Ô€Decrees€date€back€to€1945€and€1946,€they€have€continuingÐ Zª Ðeffects€which€in€themselves€constitute€violations€of€the€Covenant.€In€particular,€theÐ @ Ðdeprivation€of€Czech€citizenship€has€continuing€effects€and€prevents€him€and€members€ofÐ &v Ðhis€family€from€returning€to€the€Czech€Republic€except€as€tourists.€Current€Czech€law€doesÐ  \ Ðnot€provide€a€right€for€former€Czech€citizens€of€German€ethnic€origin€to€return€and€settleÐ òB Ðthere.€Moreover,€the€Ô_ÔBenesÔ_Ô€Decrees€were€reaffirmed€in€the€judgment€of€the€CzechÐ Ø( ÐConstitutional€Court€of€8€March€1995.€The€discriminatory€law€on€restitution€of€1991€alsoÐ ¾ Ðfalls€within€the€period€of€application€of€the€Covenant€and€the€Optional€Protocol€to€the€CzechÐ ¤ô ÐRepublic.€Ð Š Ú ÐÌ3.7€As€to€the€requirement€of€exhaustion€of€domestic€remedies,€the€author€states€that€not€onlyÐ V"¦! Ðdoes€Czech€legislation€not€establish€a€recourse€for€persons€in€his€situation,€but,€moreover,Ð <#Œ" Ðas€long€as€the€discriminatory€Ô_ÔBenesÔ_Ô€Decrees€are€held€to€be€valid€and€constitutional,€anyÐ "$r# Ðappeal€against€them€is€futile.€In€this€context€the€author€refers€to€a€recent€challenge€of€theÐ %X $ ÐÔ_ÔBenesÔ_Ô€Decrees,€which€an€ethnic€German€resident€in€the€Czech€Republic€brought€before€theÐ î%>!% ÐConstitutional€Court€of€the€Czech€Republic.€On€8€March€1995€the€Court€ruled€that€the€Ô_ÔBenesÔ_ÔÐ Ô&$"& ÐDecrees€were€valid€and€constitutional.€Therefore,€no€suitable€and€effective€remedies€existÐ º' #' Ðin€the€Czech€Republic.€Ð  (ð#( ÐÌòòState€party's€observations€on€admissibilityóó€Ð l*¼%* ÐÌ4.1€By€submission€of€15€February€1996,€the€State€party€notes€that€the€author€is€a€GermanÐ 8,ˆ', Ðcitizen€residing€in€Germany.€At€the€time€of€submission€of€the€communication,€he€was€notÐ -n(- Ða€citizen€nor€a€resident€of€the€Czech€Republic€and€thus€did€not€hold€any€legally€relevantÐ ° Ðstatus€in€the€territory€of€the€Czech€republic.€Ð –æ ÐÌ4.2€The€State€party€recalls€that€Decree€No.€33€of€2€August€1945,€through€which€the€authorÐ b² Ðwas€deprived€of€his€Czechoslovak€citizenship,€contained€provisions€enabling€restoration€ofÐ H˜ ÐCzechoslovak€citizenship.€Applications€for€restoration€of€citizenship€were€to€be€lodged€withÐ . ~ Ðthe€appropriate€authority€within€six€months€of€the€decree€being€issued.€Since€the€author€andÐ  d Ðhis€family€did€not€avail€themselves€of€this€opportunity€to€have€their€citizenship€restored€toÐ ú J Ðthem,€the€State€party€submits€that€domestic€remedies€have€not€been€exhausted.€Ð à 0 ÐÌ4.3€The€State€party€challenges€the€author's€argument€that€he€and€his€family€did€not€have€anyÐ ¬ ü  Ðreal€opportunity€to€oppose€their€removal€from€Czechoslovakia.€The€State€party€argues€thatÐ ’â  Ðthe€author€and€his€family€left€the€country€not€due€to€coercion€but€by€their€own€choice.€SinceÐ xÈ  Ðthey€were€still€Ô_ÔCzechslovakianÔ_Ô€citizens€at€the€time€they€left€the€country,€they€could€haveÐ ^®  Ðmade€use€of€the€remedies€available€to€all€nationals.€They€also€failed€to€exhaust€domesticÐ D”  Ðremedies€against€the€deprivation€of€their€citizenship.€With€reference€to€the€principleÐ *z  ÐòòÔ_ÔignoratiaÔ_Ô€legis€Ô_ÔneminemÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔexcusatÔ_Ôóó,€the€State€party€maintains€that€the€legal€status€of€the€authorÐ ` Ðand€his€family€changed€due€to€omission€on€their€part€and€that€the€possible€objection€that€theyÐ öF Ðwere€not€informed€about€the€appropriate€legislation€is€irrelevant.€Ð Ü, ÐÌ4.4€With€regard€to€the€expropriation€of€his€family's€property,€and€the€ensuing€allegedÐ ¨ø Ðviolation€of€his€Covenant€rights,€the€State€party€points€out€that€it€has€only€been€bound€by€theÐ ŽÞ ÐCovenant€since€its€entry€into€force€in€1976,€and€argues€that€the€Covenant€can€thus€not€beÐ tÄ Ðapplied€to€events€that€occurred€in€1945„1946.€With€regard€to€the€author's€argument€that€theÐ Zª ÐConstitutional€Court's€judgement€of€8€March€1995€reaffirms€the€violations€of€the€past,€andÐ @ Ðmakes€any€appeal€to€the€Courts€futile,€the€State€party€points€out€that€following€the€saidÐ &v Ðjudgement€decree€No.€108/1945€no€longer€operates€as€a€constitutional€regulation€and€that€theÐ  \ Ðcompatibility€of€the€decree€with€higher€laws€(such€as€the€Constitution€and€the€Covenant)€canÐ òB Ðthus€be€challenged€before€the€courts.€In€this€context,€the€State€party€points€out€thatÐ Ø( ÐConstitutional€Law€No.2/1993€(Charter€of€Fundamental€Rights€and€Freedoms)€contains€aÐ ¾ Ðprohibition€of€any€form€of€discrimination.€The€State€party€therefore€challenges€the€author'sÐ ¤ô Ðstatement€that€exhaustion€of€domestic€remedies€would€be€futile.€According€to€the€State€party,Ð Š Ú Ðthe€author's€statement€demonstrates€ignorance€of€Czech€law€and€is€incorrect.€Ð p!À  ÐÌ4.5€The€State€party€submits€that€international€treaties€on€human€rights€and€fundamentalÐ <#Œ" Ðfreedoms€binding€on€the€Czech€Republic€are€immediately€applicable€and€superior€to€law.Ð "$r# ÐThe€State€party€explains€that€its€Constitutional€Court€has€the€power€to€nullify€laws€orÐ %X $ Ðregulations€if€it€determines€that€they€are€unconstitutional.€Anyone€who€claims€that€his€or€herÐ î%>!% Ðrights€have€been€violated€by€a€decision€of€a€public€authority€may€submit€a€motion€for€reviewÐ Ô&$"& Ðof€the€legality€of€such€decision.€Ð º' #' ÐÌ4.6€With€regard€to€the€author's€argument€that€the€violation€of€his€rights€continues€under€theÐ †)Ö$) Ðexisting€Czech€legislation,€the€State€party€claims€that€the€author€could€have,€on€the€basis€ofÐ l*¼%* Ðthe€direct€applicability€of€the€Covenant€in€Czech€legislation,€brought€action€before€the€CzechÐ R+¢&+ Ðcourts.€Moreover,€the€State€party€denies€that€the€author's€rights€were€ever€violated€andÐ 8,ˆ', Ðconsequently€the€alleged€violations€cannot€continue€at€present€either.€Ð -n(- Ї4.7€In€conclusion,€the€State€party€requests€the€Committee€to€declare€the€communicationÐ ° Ðinadmissible€on€the€grounds€that€the€author€has€failed€to€exhaust€domestic€remedies,€and€onÐ –æ Ðthe€ground€that€the€alleged€violations€occurred€before€the€entry€into€force€of€the€CovenantÐ |Ì Ðand€the€Optional€Protocol€thereto.€Ð b² ÐÌòòAuthor's€commentsóó€Ð . ~ ÐÌ5.1€In€his€comments€on€the€State€party's€submission,€counsel€recalls€that€it€is€not€the€author'sÐ ú J Ðfault€that€he€is€no€longer€a€Czech€citizen€nor€has€residence€in€the€Czech€Republic€becauseÐ à 0 Ðhe€was€stripped€of€his€citizenship€and€was€expelled€by€the€State€party.€Ð Æ   ÐÌ5.2€Counsel€argues€that€the€State€party€is€likewise€Ô_ÔestoppedÔ_Ô€from€claiming€that€the€authorÐ ’â  Ðor€his€family€could€have€regained€his€citizenship€pursuant€to€an€application.€Counsel€recallsÐ xÈ  Ðthat€at€the€time€the€author€and€his€family,€despite€the€fact€that€they€were€members€of€theÐ ^®  ÐSocial€Democratic€Party€and€anti„fascists,€were€already€expelled€by€the€State€party€(JulyÐ D”  Ð1945)€which€had€also€confiscated€all€of€their€property,€as€a€result€of€which€they€were€totallyÐ *z  Ðdestitute.€As€a€consequence,€the€remedies€existing€in€1945€were€in€practice€not€available€toÐ ` Ðthe€author€and€his€family,€nor€to€most€Germans.€Counsel€submits€that€if€the€State€partyÐ öF Ðcontends€that€persons€in€the€situation€of€the€author€could€have€availed€themselves€ofÐ Ü, Ðeffective€domestic€remedies,€it€should€provide€examples€of€those€who€did€so€successfully.€Ð  ÐÌ5.3€The€author€points€out€that€at€the€time€of€the€expulsion€of€his€family,€they€were€treatedÐ ŽÞ Ðas€total€outlaws.€Thousands€of€Germans€were€detained€in€camps.€According€to€the€author,Ð tÄ Ðnot€only€was€a€complaint€to€the€Czech€authorities€futile,€but€in€many€cases€when€people€didÐ Zª Ðcomplain,€they€were€subjected€to€physical€abuse.€Ð @ ÐÌ5.4€The€author€acknowledges€that€the€Covenant€entered€into€force€for€Czechoslovakia€onlyÐ  \ Ðin€1976.€However,€he€contends€that€the€restitution€legislation€of€1991€is€discriminatory,Ð òB Ðbecause€it€excludes€restitution€for€the€German€minority.€Furthermore,€he€argues€that€theÐ Ø( ÐConstitutional€Court's€decision€of€8€March€1995,€which€confirmed€the€continuing€validityÐ ¾ Ðof€the€Ô_ÔBenesÔ_Ô€Decrees,€is€a€confirmation€of€a€past€violation€and€thus€brings€theÐ ¤ô Ðcommunication€within€the€applicability€of€the€Covenant€and€the€Optional€Protocol.€CounselÐ Š Ú Ðrefers€to€the€Committee's€Views€in€case€No.€516/1992€(Ô_ÔSimunekÔ_Ô€v.€Czech€Republic),€whereÐ p!À  Ðthe€Committee€held€that€confiscations€that€occurred€in€the€period€prior€to€the€entry€into€forceÐ V"¦! Ðof€the€Covenant€and€Optional€Protocol€may€nevertheless€be€the€subject€of€a€communicationÐ <#Œ" Ðbefore€the€Committee€if€the€effects€of€the€confiscations€have€continued€or€if€the€legislationÐ "$r# Ðintended€to€remedy€the€confiscations€is€discriminatory.€Ð %X $ ÐÌ5.5€With€regard€to€the€Constitutional€Court's€statement€that€decree€No.€108/1945€no€longerÐ Ô&$"& Ðhad€a€constitutive€character,€the€author€submits€that€this€is€a€statement€of€fact,€since€theÐ º' #' Ðconfiscations€had€been€completed€and€the€Germans€had€no€possibility€to€contest€them.€WithÐ  (ð#( Ðregard€to€the€State€party's€statement€that€the€Constitutional€Court€has€the€power€to€repealÐ †)Ö$) Ðlaws€or€their€provisions€if€they€are€inconsistent€with€the€Constitution€or€with€an€internationalÐ l*¼%* Ðhuman€rights€treaty,€counsel€submits€that€the€Constitutional€Court€was€requested€to€repealÐ R+¢&+ Ðthe€Ô_ÔBenesÔ_Ô€decrees€as€being€discriminatory€but€instead€confirmed€their€constitutionality€in€itsÐ 8,ˆ', Ðjudgement€of€8€March€1995.€Following€this€judgement,€no€effective€remedy€is€available€toÐ -n(- Ðthe€author,€as€it€would€be€futile€to€challenge€the€legality€of€the€decrees€again.€Ð ° ÐÌ5.6€With€regard€to€the€State€party's€claim€that€domestic€remedies€are€available€to€the€authorÐ |Ì Ðat€present,€counsel€requests€the€State€party€to€indicate€precisely,€in€the€circumstances€of€theÐ b² Ðauthor's€case,€what€procedure€would€be€available€to€him€and€to€give€examples€of€successfulÐ H˜ Ðuse€of€this€procedure€by€others.€In€this€connection,€counsel€refers€to€the€Committee'sÐ . ~ Ðjurisprudence€that€it€is€not€sufficient€for€a€State€party€to€list€the€legislation€in€question,€butÐ  d Ðthat€a€State€party€should€explain€how€an€author€can€avail€himself€of€the€legislation€in€hisÐ ú J Ðconcrete€situation.€Ð à 0 ÐÌ5.7€Finally,€counsel€argues€that€if€indeed€the€Covenant€is€superior€to€Czech€law,€then€theÐ ¬ ü  ÐState€party€is€under€an€obligation€to€correct€the€discrimination€to€which€the€author€and€hisÐ ’â  Ðfamily€were€subjected€in€1945€and€all€the€consequences€emanating€therefrom.€According€toÐ xÈ  Ðcounsel,€there€is€no€indication€that€the€State€party€is€prepared€to€do€so.€On€the€contrary,Ð ^®  Ðcounsel€claims€that€recent€statements€by€high€officials€in€the€State€party's€Government,Ð D”  Ðannouncing€the€privatization€of€formerly€confiscated€German€property,€show€that€there€isÐ *z  Ðno€willingness€on€the€part€of€the€State€party€to€give€any€relief€to€the€author€or€anyone€in€aÐ ` Ðsimilar€situation.€Ð öF ÐÌòòIssues€and€proceedings€before€the€Committeeóó€Ð  ÐÌ6.1€Before€considering€any€claim€contained€in€a€communication,€the€Human€RightsÐ ŽÞ ÐCommittee€must,€in€accordance€with€rule€87€of€its€rules€of€procedure,€decide€whether€or€notÐ tÄ Ðit€is€admissible€under€the€Optional€Protocol€to€the€Covenant.€Ð Zª ÐÌ6.2€With€regard€to€the€author's€claim€under€article€12,€paragraph€4,€of€the€covenant,€theÐ &v ÐCommittee€notes€that€the€deprivation€of€his€citizenship€was€based€on€Ô_ÔBenesÔ_Ô'€decree€No.€33.Ð  \ ÐAlthough€the€Constitutional€Court€in€the€Czech€Republic€declared€Ô_ÔBenesÔ_Ô'€decree€No.€108,Ð òB Ðauthorizing€the€confiscation€of€properties€belonging€to€ethnic€Germans,€constitutional,€theÐ Ø( ÐCourt€was€never€called€upon€to€decide€the€constitutionally€of€decree€No.€33.€The€CommitteeÐ ¾ Ðalso€notes€that,€following€the€Court's€judgment€of€8€March€1995,€the€Ô_ÔBenesÔ_Ô'€decrees€have€lostÐ ¤ô Ðtheir€constitutional€status.€The€compatibility€of€decree€No.€33€with€higher€laws,€includingÐ Š Ú Ðthe€Covenant€which€has€been€incorporated€in€Czech€national€law,€can€thus€be€challengedÐ p!À  Ðbefore€the€courts€in€the€Czech€Republic.€The€Committee€considers€that€under€article€5,Ð V"¦! Ðparagraph€2€(b),€of€the€Optional€Protocol,€the€author€should€bring€his€claim€first€before€theÐ <#Œ" Ðdomestic€courts€before€the€Committee€is€in€a€position€to€examine€his€communication.€ThisÐ "$r# Ðclaim€is€thus€inadmissible€for€non„exhaustion€of€domestic€remedies.€Ð %X $ ÐÌ6.3€The€Committee€likewise€considers€that€the€author€has€failed€to€substantiate,€for€purposesÐ Ô&$"& Ðof€admissibility,€his€claim€under€article€27€of€the€Covenant.€This€part€of€the€communicationÐ º' #' Ðis€thus€inadmissible€under€article€2€of€the€Optional€Protocol.€Ð  (ð#( ÐÌ6.4€The€author€has€further€claimed€violations€of€articles€14€and€26,€because,€whereas€a€lawÐ l*¼%* Ðhas€been€enacted€to€provide€compensation€to€Czech€citizens€for€properties€confiscated€in€theÐ R+¢&+ Ðperiod€from€1948€to€1989,€no€compensation€law€has€been€enacted€for€ethnic€Germans€forÐ 8,ˆ', Ðproperties€confiscated€in€1945€and€1946€following€the€Ô_ÔBenesÔ_Ô€decrees.€Ð -n(- Ї6.5€The€Committee€has€consistently€held€that€not€every€distinction€or€differentiation€inÐ ° Ðtreatment€amounts€to€discrimination€within€the€meaning€of€articles€2€and€26.€The€CommitteeÐ –æ Ðconsiders€that€in€the€present€case,€legislation€adopted€after€the€fall€of€the€Communist€regimeÐ |Ì Ðin€Czechoslovakia€to€compensate€victims€of€that€regime€does€not€appear€to€be€òòprima€facieóóÐ b² Ðdiscriminatory€within€the€meaning€of€article€26€merely€because,€as€the€author€contends,€itÐ H˜ Ðdoes€not€compensate€the€victims€of€injustices€committed€in€the€period€before€the€communistÐ . ~ Ðregimeòò€2óó.€The€Committee€considers€that€the€author€has€failed€to€substantiate,€for€purposes€ofÐ  d Ðadmissibility,€his€claim€that€he€is€a€victim€of€violations€of€articles€14€and€26€in€this€regard.Ð ú J ÐThis€part€of€the€communication€is€thus€inadmissible€under€article€2€of€the€Optional€Protocol.€Ð à 0 ÐÌ7.€The€Human€Rights€Committee€therefore€decides:€Ð ¬ ü  ÐÌ(a)€that€the€communication€is€inadmissible;€Ð xÈ  ÐÌ(b)€that€this€decision€shall€be€communicated€to€the€State€party€and€to€the€author.€Ð D”  ÐÌÌ__________Ð öF ÐÌ*The€following€members€of€the€Committee€participated€in€the€examination€of€theÐ Â Ðcommunication:€Mr.€Ô_ÔPrafullachandraÔ_Ô€N.€Ô_ÔBhagwatiÔ_Ô,€Mr.€Th.€Ô_ÔBuergenthalÔ_Ô,€Lord€Ô_ÔColvilleÔ_Ô,€Mr.Ð ¨ø ÐÔ_ÔOmranÔ_Ô€El€Ô_ÔShafeiÔ_Ô,€Ms.€Elizabeth€Ô_ÔEvattÔ_Ô,€Ms.€Pilar€Ô_ÔGaitanÔ_Ô€de€Ô_ÔPomboÔ_Ô,€Mr.€Ô_ÔEckartÔ_Ô€Klein,€Mr.Ð ŽÞ ÐDavid€Ô_ÔKretzmerÔ_Ô,€Mr.€Ô_ÔRajsoomerÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔLallahÔ_Ô,€Ms.€Cecilia€Medina€Ô_ÔQuirogaÔ_Ô,€Mr.€J.€Prado€Vallejo,Ð tÄ ÐMr.€Martin€Ô_ÔScheininÔ_Ô,€Mr.€R.€Ô_ÔWieruszewskiÔ_Ô,€and€Mr.€Maxwell€Ô_ÔYaldenÔ_Ô.€Ð Zª ÐÌ**The€text€of€an€individual€opinion€signed€by€Committee€members€Ô_ÔE.KleinÔ_Ô€and€Ô_ÔC.MedinaÔ_ÔÐ &v ÐÔ_ÔQuirogaÔ_Ô€is€appended€to€the€present€document.€Ð  \ ÐÌ1/€€The€Czech€and€Slovak€Federal€Republic€ceased€to€exist€on€31€December€1992.€On€22Ð Ø( ÐFebruary€1993,€the€Czech€Republic€notified€its€succession€to€the€Covenant€and€the€OptionalÐ ¾ ÐProtocol.€Ð ¤ô ÐÌ2/€€See€the€Committee's€decision€declaring€inadmissible€communication€No.€643/1995,Ð p!À  Ð(Ô_ÔDrobekÔ_Ô€v.€Slovakia),€14€July€1997.Ð V"¦! ÐÌ[Adopted€in€English,€French€and€Spanish,€the€English€text€being€the€original€version.Ð "$r# ÐSubsequently€to€be€issued€also€in€Arabic,€Chinese€and€Russian€as€part€of€the€Ô_ÔCommitteeeÔ_Ô'sÐ %X $ Ðannual€report€to€the€General€Assembly.]€Ð î%>!% ÐÌÌÓÓÓ  Óòòò òAppendixó óóóÐ  (ð#( ÐÓoÓÓÓÌÌòòIndividual€Opinion€by€Committee€members€Cecilia€Medina€Ô_ÔQuirogaÔ_Ô€and€Ô_ÔEckartÔ_Ô€Klein€Ð R+¢&+ Ð(partly€dissentingóó)Ð 8,ˆ', ÐÐ -n(- ÐTo€our€regret€we€cannot€follow€the€Committee's€decision€that€the€communication€is€alsoÐ ° Ðinadmissible€as€far€as€the€author€claims€that€he€is€a€victim€of€a€violation€of€article€26€of€theÐ –æ ÐCovenant,€because€the€Law€No.€87/1991€would€deliberately€discriminate€against€him€forÐ |Ì Ðethnical€reasons€(See€para.€3.5).€For€the€reasons€given€in€our€Individual€Opinion€inÐ b² ÐCommunication€No.€643/1995,€(Ô_ÔDrobekÔ_Ô€v.€Slovakia)€we€think€that€the€Committee€shouldÐ H˜ Ðhave€declared€the€communication€admissible€in€this€regard.€Ð . ~ ÐÌCecilia€Medina€Ô_ÔQuirogaÔ_Ô€(signed)€Ð ú J ÐÌÔ_ÔEckartÔ_Ô€Klein€(signed)€Ð Æ   ÐÓMoÓ