WPC  YNsMb>@ vh eF}uYU\|=7"Khoj5aOٹh?6](]LGGHQ[mN 1-qV.F<Vl Mni]);^*=VYT.1JLI,1ڐ)S$|#:ad-[ D,!J#"hr +0Fn(KÄ-B'{U5鮄C*;|* Lmm,^^2saD hAmTzw{"l6JWpAt ϶iz  X"pA Xڃ $yP] Ԣ93+k*\hf#vOAU>B 0nL 0i 0Y# 0_| 0&U6 %7 = 0M # UN M" (& NN ^ P w\ 4` t mv \  `&Times New Roman' United Nations Human Rights Website - Treaty Bodies Database - Document - Jurisprudence - 4nt - Jurisprudence - "Angie Dituri"0Angie Dituri .   <:Default ParaXXX< :Normal (Web) S =jS =jS64Hyperlink    <:FollowedHype    <qy:HTML TypewriK<6X9`(Courier NewK  XXXS\  `&Times New RomanS  <6X9`(Courier New X#|x($..       XXX XXXX XHP LaserJet 6P/6MP - Standard,,,,,,0(hH  Z6Times New Roman Regular* p*+00U  !..       XkPXX XXkPXX XkP  _ HUMANRIGHTSCOMMITTEE  _Jakes_Ԁand_Mazurkiewiczova_Ԁv.CzechRepublic | CommunicationN724/1996** H 26July1999  d _CCPR_/C/66/D/724/1996*  0   ADMISSIBILITY    Submittedby:_Jarmila_Ԁ_Mazurkiewiczova_Ԁ D  Allegedvictim:Theauthorandherfather,_Jaroslav_Ԁ_Jakes_Ԁ ` Stateparty:CzechRepublic , Dateofcommunication:22January1996    TheHumanRightsCommittee,establishedunderarticle28oftheInternationalCovenant Z onCivilandPoliticalRights, @ Meetingon26July1999  \ Adoptsthefollowing: (    Decisiononadmissibility        1.Theauthorofthecommunicationis_Jarmila_Ԁ_Mazurkiewiczova_,aCzechcitizen,currently <#" residinginBrno,CzechRepublic.Shesubmitsthecommunicationonherownbehalfand "$r# innameofherfather,_Jaroslav_Ԁ_Jakes_,whowasbornin1897anddiedin1979.Sheclaims %X $ tobeavictimofhumanrightsviolationsbytheCzechRepublic,withoutinvokingspecific %>!% articlesoftheCovenant. &$"& Factsassubmittedbytheauthor (#( 2.1Theauthor'sfather,_Jaroslav_Ԁ_Jakes_,wasaCzechcitizenandbusinessman,marriedtoa l*%* Germanwoman.HeownedahotelwithrestaurantinBrno.AftertheSecondWorldWar, R+&+ hewasaccusedofbeingacollaboratoranddetained.Laterhowever,hewasacquittedand 8,', receivedhiscertificateofreliability. -n(- Ї2.2WhileMr._Jakes_'casewasbeinginvestigated,hishotelwasplacedundernational  administration.On27January1948,afterhisnamehadbeencleared,Mr._Jakes_Ԁrequested  theabolitionofthismeasure.Buton17January1950,theNationalCommitteeofBrno | issuedanorder(No.252.067/46VII/3)confiscatingMr._Jakes_'propertyinapplicationof b presidentialdecreeNo.108/1945.Theauthorexplainsthatasof1950,herfatherwasseen H asacapitalistandthusanenemyoftheregime. . ~ 2.3FollowingthepublicationofLawNo.87/1991,regulatingtherestitutionofproperty  J unlawfullytakenbytheCommunistregime,theauthor'smother,whowasthenstillalivebut  0 subsequentlydiedinApril1992,initiatedtheproceduretoregainherpropertyrights.She    arguedthatdecree108/1945hadnotbeenappliedcorrectlyinMr._Jakes_'case,buthadbeen    abusedtoconfiscatehispropertybecausehewasanopponentoftheregime.   2.4Whenhermotherdied,theauthor,asherheir,continuedtheprocedureshehadinitiated. ^  Herrequestwasrejectedonthegroundthatthelawdidnotapplytoconfiscationunderthe D  _Benes_Ԁdecrees,nortoconfiscationoccurringpriorto25February1948. *z  2.5TheauthorappealedthejudgmentoftheCityCourtofBrnototheRegionalCourtof F Brno,andfurthertotheSupremeCourtandthentotheConstitutionalCourt,whichrejected , herclaimin1994.Withthisalldomesticremediesaresaidtohavebeenexhausted.  Thecomplaint  3.Theauthorarguesthatherfatherhasbeenunjustlytreatedonsuspicionthathewasa Z collaborator.Shefurtherclaimsthatinothersimilarcases,propertyhasbeenrestoredbythe @ ConstitutionalCourtonthegroundthatthepresidentialdecreehadbeenabusedtoconfiscate &v propertyforpoliticalreasons.SherequeststheCommitteetodeterminethatherfatherwas  \ notacollaboratorandthatthe_Benes_Ԁdecreewasunlawfullyappliedtohim. B Stateparty'sobservations  4.1Bysubmissionof14February1997,theStatepartyarguesthatthecommunicationis   inadmissible. p!  4.2AccordingtotheStateparty,Mr._Jakes_'propertywasconfiscatedunderdecree108/1945 <#" on5October1946,andtheconfiscationwasreaffirmedon17January1950.LawNo. "$r# 87/1991appliesonlytoconfiscationsafter25February1948,andisthusnotapplicablein %X $ theauthor'scase,asaffirmedbythecourts. %>!% 4.3TheStatepartynotesthattheauthorfiledanapplicationwiththeEuropeanCommission ' #' ofHumanRights.Theapplicationwasdeclaredinadmissible. (#( 4.4TheStatepartysubmitsthatconfiscationordersmaybeclassifiedasimplyinganabuse l*%* ofthedecreeforthepurposesofpoliticalpersecutiononlyincaseswhereitisproven R+&+ beyonddoubtthatthepersonconcerneddidnotcomeunderanyofthecategoriesdefined 8,', inthedecree.Insuchcases,thepropertyisdeemedtohavedevolvedtotheStatebyvirtue -n(- ofanadministrativeacteffectedinconsequenceofpoliticalpersecutionoractionsviolating  thegenerallyrecognizedhumanrightsandfreedomsandtheformerownershavethelegal  righttorestitution,iftheconfiscationorderwasissuedintheperiodtowhichLawNo. | 87/1991applies,i.e.after25February1948. b 4.5Intheinstantcase,theconfiscationorderwasissuedin1946,thuspriortothedecisive . ~ period,andthepropertyremainedinpossessionoftheState.Thesecondconfiscationorder,  d reaffirmingthepreviousone,isthusirrelevantforpurposesofLawNo.87/1991.  J 4.6Withregardtotheauthor'sclaimthattheconfiscationorderaffectedherfather'spersonal    integrityandreputation,theStatepartyarguesthattheclaimisinadmissible_ratione_    _temporis_.   4.7Withregardtotheauthor'sreferencetoothercases,theStatepartyexplainsthatthe ^  ConstitutionalCourtintwocaseshasruledin_favour_Ԁofapersonwhosepropertywas D  unlawfullyconfiscatedunderthe_Benes_Ԁdecrees.However,inthosecasestheconfiscation *z  orderwasissuedafter25February1948,andthecourtswherethuscompetenttoreview ` whethertheconfiscationorderscompliedwiththedecree.Sincetheevidenceshowedthat F itdidnot,andthatthedecreewasabusedinthecontextofpoliticalpersecution,thetransfers , ofthepropertywerenoteffectedex_lege_Ԁon30October1945.TheConstitutionalCourt  thereforeannulledthedecisionsofthelowercourtswhichhadrefusedtoreviewthelegality  oftheconfiscationorders,consideringthattheyhadviolatedtherighttofairtrial.  4.8TheStatepartyrecallsthatintheauthor'scase,theconfiscationorderwasissuedin Z 1946,beforethedecisiveperiodofLawNo.87/1991,andcanthusnotbereviewed.Since @ theauthorinherapplicationtotheConstitutionalCourt,didnotexplainhowher &v constitutionalrightswereallegedlyviolated,theConstitutionalCourtcoulddonothingbut  \ dismisshercomplaint.TheStatepartyconcludesthatthecommunicationisinadmissiblefor B failuretoexhaustdomesticremedies,astheConstitutionalCourtnevermadeafindingon ( themeritsoftheauthor'scase.  4.9TheStatepartyfurtherarguesthatthecommunicationisinadmissible_ratione_Ԁ_materiae_   insofarasitinvokestherighttoproperty,whichisnotprotectedbytheCovenant. p!  4.10TheStatepartyfurthernotesthatthemainissueinthecommunicationistheauthor's <#" disagreementwiththelegalviewsexpressedbythecourts.Inthiscontext,theStateparty "$r# arguesthattheHumanRightsCommitteeisnotcompetenttoconsiderwhetherthedomestic %X $ authoritiesandcourtscorrectlyinterpretandapplynationallegislation,andthatthe %>!% communicationisthusinadmissible_ratione_Ԁ_materiae_. &$"& 4.11TheStatepartyalsochallengestheadmissibilityofthecommunication_ratione_ (#( _temporis_,astheactaffectingthefather'srighttopropertydatesfrombeforetheentryinto )$) forceoftheCovenantfortheCzechRepublic.Inthiscontext,theStatepartysubmitsthat l*%* thecourtswerenotcompetentunderLawNo.87/1991toexaminetheownershipandthe R+&+ mannerinwhichitwasextinguished,andthattheirdecisionscanthusnotviolatetheright 8,', topropertyortheauthor'srighttoinheritance. -n(- ЇAuthor'scomments  5.Inhercomments,theauthorprovidesevidencetoshowthatherfatherwasnota | collaborator,butloyaltotheCzechRepublic.SherequeststheCommitteetorehabilitateher b fatherandstatesthatshehasexhaustedallavailabledomesticremedies. H IssuesandproceedingsbeforetheCommittee  d 6.1Beforeconsideringanyclaimscontainedinacommunication,theHumanRights  0 Committeemust,inaccordancewitharticle87ofitsrulesofprocedure,decidewhetheror    notitisadmissibleundertheOptionalProtocoltotheCovenant.    6.2Theauthorcomplainsthattheconfiscationofherfather'spropertywasaresultof x  politicalpersecutionandthatdecreeNo.108/1945wasunlawfullyappliedtohim.The ^  CommitteerecallsthattherighttopropertyisnotprotectedbytheCovenant1,andthatitis D  thusincompetent_ratione_Ԁ_materiae_toconsideranyallegedcontinuingviolationsofthisright *z  aftertheentryintoforceoftheCovenantandOptionalProtocolfortheCzechRepublic. ` 6.3Insofarastheauthor'scommunicationmayraiseissuesunderarticle26ofthe , Covenant,theCommitteenotesthattheauthorhasfailedtobringtheclaimsof  discriminationbeforetheConstitutionalCourt.Thispartofthecommunicationistherefore  inadmissiblefornonexhaustionof_dometic_Ԁremediesunderarticle5,paragraph2(b),ofthe  OptionalProtocol. t 7.TheCommitteethereforedecides: @ a)thatthecommunicationisinadmissibleunderarticles3and5(2)(b)oftheOptional  \ Protocol; B b)thatthisdecisionshallbecommunicatedtotheStatepartyandtotheauthor.  _________________ p!  *ThefollowingmembersoftheCommitteeparticipatedintheexaminationofthepresent <#" communication:Mr._Abdelfattah_ԀAmor,Mr._Nisuke_Ԁ_Ando_,Mr._Prafullachandra_ԀN. "$r# _Bhagwati_,Ms.Christine_Chanet_,Ms.Elizabeth_Evatt_,Ms.Pilar_Gaitn_Ԁde_Pombo_,Mr. %X $ _Eckart_ԀKlein,Mr.David_Kretzmer_,Ms.CeciliaMedina_Quiroga_,Mr.Martin_Scheinin_,Mr. %>!% _Hip;lito_Ԁ_Solari_Ԁ_Yrigoyen_,Mr.Roman_Wieruszewski_,Mr.Maxwell_Yalden_ԀandMr._Abdallah_ &$"& _Zakhia_. ' #' **ThetextofanindividualopinionbyoneCommitteememberisattachedtothepresent )$) document. l*%* 1/SeealsotheCommittee'sdecisionincommunicationNo.544/1993,K.J.L.v. 8,', _Finland,declared_Ԁinadmissibleon3November1993. -n(- Ї[AdoptedinEnglish,FrenchandSpanish,theEnglishtextbeingtheoriginalversion.  SubsequentlytobeissuedalsoinArabic,ChineseandRussianaspartoftheCommittee's  annualreporttotheGeneralAssembly.] | {   Appendix  . ~  :IndividualopinionbyCommitteemember_Nisuke_Ԁ_Ando_Ԁ(partlydissenting)  0 IamunabletoconcurwiththeCommittee'sconclusionthattheauthor'sclaimbedeclared    inadmissibleonthetwogrounds:one,onthebasisof_ratione_Ԁ_materiae_;theother,onthebasis   ofnonexhaustionofdomesticremedies. x  WhileIagreewiththefirstground,theCommitteesimplynotesthattheauthorhasfailed D  tobringtheclaimofdiscriminationbeforetheConstitutionalCourtandconcludesthatthe *z  communicationisinadmissible.Inthisconnection,theStatepartycontendsthatthe ` Committeeisnotcompetenttoconsiderwhetherthedomesticauthoritiesandcourts F correctly_interprete_Ԁandapplynationallegislation.Thiscontentioncausesmetowonderif , theauthorcouldhaveraisedtheissueunderarticle26oftheCovenantbeforethedomestic  courts.Consequently,theCommitteeshouldhaveexaminedthepossibilityandavailability  fortheauthortoraisethatissueatdomesticcourtsbeforeitconcludedthattheclaimis  inadmissible. t _Nisuke_Ԁ_Ando_Ԁ[signed] @ [DoneinEnglish,FrenchandSpanish,theEnglishtextbeingtheoriginalversion.  \ Subsequentlytobe_translated_ԀalsoinArabic,ChineseandRussianaspartofthe B Committee'sannualreporttotheGeneralAssembly.] ( P: