ÿWPC í9g2êûOÕæñˆSýóF¤]ÆyºÓ^¦£=ï‘(Çì´´²ÞS#d( BN¶¢=Ñu{Tv\,-kâù&® éGªeY1ïoUg¨¼¿v…9¨Â†üÁÀ뤼€û>ñËÅ@´0uÜ>ú6û^B ­Á—Lк=`þ×ßZ‘ZçŠièJOsOÿuedS_ÉíƒCé˜ä4‚;GCÝ÷fŽY> ÐÀM‚VNF“Œ"ß&œðÖqOôfðÚÇIö!ª*"= K¼,\&=íù8Wꡲ\.¶×ßxðíKv4YSN°3”¬b6,ˆQ³Æzjm Aù ¬ñC@oé웂NÖJ€'2)4ÑL!Öä;+,Z—-ŽVßì.*ÒùMùl¶ûd9J-“¿l̪ 0µv 0<+ 0Yg 0_À 0iƈ 0ÑN 0( D+G AMr ¿ 0¶Ï #Á… UNF %” Mš (ž NÆ ^ È wÔ 4Ø ì mî ô\  `‹&Times New Roman' A. S. v. Canada, Communication No. 68/1980 (31 March 1981), U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/OP/1 at 27 (14 CCPR/C/OP/1 at 27 (1"Angie Dituri"0Angie Dituri .   6F , ÿÿ4Heading 3Ô S ÔÓ p^SÓÔ€£££Ôò òÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ€XXXÔó óÓ p^SÓ<ÿÿ:Default Para6ÿÿ4HyperlinkóóòòÔ ÿ ÔóóÔ  Ô<ÿÿ:FollowedHypeóóòòÔ  ÔóóÔ  Ô< ÿÿ:Normal (Web)Ô S ÔÓ =jSÓÓ =jSÓ Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5(©2 @$££Ý ƒu!ÝÒܰÒÒܰÒÔ..ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X#gXXXÔÔ€X#gXXX#gÔÝ  Ý(ÿÿ$’’'dxd A<< cÿÿ#|x(Žu$¡¡ÒܰÒÒܰÒÔ..ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X!£XXXÔÔ€X!£XXX!£Ô˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PSÈÚØÚÚØÈÚ0(ÈhH  Z‹6Times New Roman RegularXÅ¥<) ã…7)ê:i¢Ø+00ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀÝ ƒu!ÝÒܰÒÒܰÒÔ..ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X#gXXXÔÔ€X#gXXX#gÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôò òHUMAN€RIGHTS€COMMITTEEÐ ° ÐÌòòA.€S.€v.€CanadaóóÐ |Ì ÐÌCommunication€No.€68/1980Ð H˜ ÐÌ31€March€1981Ð  d ÐÌÌADMISSIBILITYó óÐ Æ   ÐÌÌòòòòSubmitted€byóó:€A.€S.€Ð xÈ  ÐÌòòAlleged€victimsóó:€The€author,€her€daughter€and€grandson€Ð D”  ÐÌòòState€partyóó:€Canada€Ð ` ÐÌòòDate€of€Communicationóóóó:€òò23€May€1980Ð Ü, ÐÌòòDate€of€decision€on€inadmissibilityóó:€31€March€1981€(twelfth€session)óó€Ð ¨ø ÐÌÌÓ  Óò òòòDecision€on€Admissibilityóóó óÐ Zª ÐÓìÓÌÌÓ  Ó1.€The€author€of€the€communication€(letter€dated€23€May€1980)€is€a€Canadian€citizen€ofÐ  \ ÐPolish€origin,€at€present€residing€in€Ontario,€Canada.€She€submitted€the€communication€onÐ òB Ðher€own€behalf€and€on€behalf€of€her€daughter€and€grandson,€alleging€that€all€her€efforts€toÐ Ø( Ðobtain€permission€from€the€Canadian€authorities€for€her€daughter€and€grandson€to€enterÐ ¾ ÐCanada€in€order€to€join€her€have€been€in€vain.€Without€specifying€a€breach€of€any€particularÐ ¤ô Ðarticle€of€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights,€she€seeks€the€Committee'sÐ Š Ú Ðassistance€in€the€matter€and€describes€the€relevant€facts€as€follows:€Ð p!À  ÐÌ2.€The€author,€who€was€born€in€Poland,€is€a€Canadian€citizen,€living€in€Ontario,€Canada.€HerÐ <#Œ" Ðdaughter,€B,€born€in€1946,€and€her€daughter's€son,€C,€born€in€1964,€live€at€Torun,€Poland.Ð "$r# ÐThey€are€both€Polish€nationals.€Ð %X $ ÐÌ3.€In€the€spring€of€1977,€the€author€filed€an€application€on€behalf€of€her€daughter€andÐ Ô&$"& Ðgrandson€at€the€appropriate€Canadian€Immigration€Office,€requesting€permission€for€themÐ º' #' Ðto€enter€Canada€in€order€to€join€the€author€as€permanent€residents.€Six€months€later,€herÐ  (ð#( Ðdaughter€was€informed€by€the€Canadian€Consul€in€Warsaw,€Poland,€that€she€was€not€eligibleÐ †)Ö$) Ðfor€entry€into€Canada,€because€she€did€not€have€a€profession€and€that,€before€the€CanadianÐ l*¼%* Ðauthorities€could€proceed€further,€an€employment€guarantee€would€have€to€be€procured€forÐ R+¢&+ Ðher.€An€employment€guarantee€was€thereupon€obtained€in€the€author's€home€town,€Windsor,Ð 8,ˆ', ÐOntario,€but€the€Windsor€Department€of€Manpower€concluded,€upon€inquiry,€that€there€wereÐ -n(- Ðalready€people€available€for€the€job€in€question€(the€job€of€a€sales€person€in€a€pet€store).€TheÐ ° Ðauthor€informed€the€immigration€authorities€in€1979€that€she€was€willing€and€able€to€buy€aÐ –æ Ðsmall€business€in€Windsor€(a€confectionery€store)€in€order€to€create€an€employmentÐ |Ì Ðopportunity€for€her€daughter€and/or€grandson.€The€author€was€then€told€to€go€ahead€and€toÐ b² Ðpurchase€the€business€in€question,€but€since€she€is€fully€employed€herself€and€would€needÐ H˜ Ðthe€assistance€of€her€daughter€and€grandson€to€run€the€business,€she€felt€she€would€not€be€inÐ . ~ Ða€position€to€purchase,€without€any€assurances€that€they€would€be€permitted€to€enter€Canada.Ð  d ÐThe€immigration€authorities€then€requested,€and€were€furnished€with,€relevant€informationÐ ú J Ðconcerning€the€author's€income€and€assets,€showing€that€she€is€able€fully€to€support€herÐ à 0 Ðdaughter€and€grandson,€being€the€owner€of€four€housing€units€in€Windsor,€all€withoutÐ Æ   Ðencumbrance,€and€having€also€a€steady€full„time€job,€as€well€as€funds€in€a€bank€account.€ThisÐ ¬ ü  Ðinformation€was€furnished€to€the€immigration€authorities€in€June€1979.€In€spite€of€repeatedÐ ’â  Ðinquiries,€the€author€has€been€unable€to€obtain€any€further€information€about€the€matter.€SheÐ xÈ  Ðfeels€that€her€daughter€and€grandson€are€unjustly€being€kept€away€from€her€and€points€outÐ ^®  Ðthat,€in€the€absence€of€an€entry€permit,€her€daughter€and€grandson€are€unable€to€make€theÐ D”  Ðnecessary€application€for€permission€to€leave€Poland.€She€states€that€there€are€no€domesticÐ *z  Ðremedies€that€could€be€further€pursued.€Ð ` ÐÌ4.€By€its€decision€of€21€July€1980,€the€Human€Rights€Committee€transmitted€theÐ Ü, Ðcommunication€under€rule€91€of€the€provisional€rules€of€procedure€to€the€State€partyÐ Â Ðconcerned,€requesting€information€and€observations€relevant€to€the€question€of€admissibilityÐ ¨ø Ðof€the€communication,€and€drawing€the€State€party's€attention€in€particular€to€the€provisionsÐ ŽÞ Ðof€articles€12,€17,€23€and€26€of€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights.€Ð tÄ ÐÌ5.1€In€its€reply€dated€2€December€1980,€the€State€party€objected€to€the€admissibility€of€theÐ @ Ðcommunication€on€the€ground€that€the€facts€of€the€case€did€not€reveal€any€breach€of€theÐ &v Ðrights€protected€under€articles€12,€17,€23€and€26€of€the€Covenant€on€Civil€and€PoliticalÐ  \ ÐRights,€and€that€furthermore€the€communication€did€not€meet€the€requirements€of€article€IÐ òB Ðof€the€Optional€Protocol€(which€stipulates€that€the€Committee€has€competence€to€receive€andÐ Ø( Ðconsider€communications€from€individuals€subject€to€a€State€party's€jurisdiction),€since€BÐ ¾ Ðand€her€son€are€not€subject€to€Canadian€jurisdiction.€In€substantiation€of€its€refutation€ofÐ ¤ô Ðbreaches€of€articles€12,€17,€23€and€26€of€the€Covenant,€the€State€party€submits€the€following:Ð Š Ú Ðthat€no€breach€of€article€12€exists€since€B€is€neither€a€Canadian€citizen€nor€a€permanentÐ p!À  Ðresident€of€that€country€and€therefore€was€not€"arbitrarily€deprived€of€the€right€to€enter€[her]Ð V"¦! Ðown€country".€As€regards€article€17,€which€prohibits€arbitrary€or€unlawful€interference€withÐ <#Œ" Ðthe€family€by€the€State,€it€is€argued€that€this€article€should€be€interpreted€primarily€asÐ "$r# Ðnegative€and€therefore€could€not€refer€to€an€obligation€by€the€State€positively€to€re„establishÐ %X $ Ðconditions€of€family€life€already€impaired.€As€regards€article€23,€which€provides€for€theÐ î%>!% Ðentitlement€of€the€family€to€protection€by€the€State,€it€is€claimed€that€such€protection€requiresÐ Ô&$"& Ða€priori€that€an€effective€family€life€between€the€members€of€the€family€must€have€existed;Ð º' #' Ðit€could€not€be€concluded€that€B€and€her€son€had€shared€an€effective€family€life€with€A.€S.,Ð  (ð#( Ðsince€B,€after€being€adopted€by€A.€S.€in€1959,€lived€with€her€in€Canada€for€two€years€only,Ð †)Ö$) Ðwhereafter€she€left€the€country€in€1961€to€return€to€Poland,€where€she€married€and€had€a€son.Ð l*¼%* ÐThe€fact€that€A.€S.€and€B€have€been€living€apart€for€17€years€clearly€demonstrates€that€aÐ R+¢&+ Ðprolonged€family€life€does€not€exist€and€that€therefore€no€breach€of€article€23€could€beÐ 8,ˆ', Ðclaimed€by€the€author.€A.€S.€'s€allegation€that€her€daughter€was€refused€an€immigration€visaÐ -n(- Ðbecause€she€did€not€have€a€profession€and€that€this€constituted€a€violation€of€article€26€of€theÐ ° ÐCovenant,€which€provides€equal€protection€of€the€law€without€any€discrimination,€is€refutedÐ –æ Ðon€the€ground€that€the€Canadian€immigration€regulations€do€not€contain€any€suchÐ |Ì Ðdiscrimination.€Ð b² ÐÌ5.2€The€State€party€further€refers€to€A.€S.'s€purported€willingness€to€purchase€a€confectioneryÐ . ~ Ðstore€and€to€offer€employment€to€her€daughter€and€argues€that€if€such€employment€hadÐ  d Ðexisted,€and€had€not€only€been€intended,€the€Canadian€immigration€authorities€could€haveÐ ú J Ðexamined€the€existing€employment€and,€if€it€met€the€conditions€laid€down€in€the€ImmigrationÐ à 0 ÐRegulations,€1978,€could€have€certified€it€as€"arranged"€employment.€In€this€case€A.€S.'sÐ Æ   Ðdaughter€would€have€been€granted€an€immigrant€visa.€Willingness€to€create€employmentÐ ¬ ü  Ðcould€not€be€substituted€for€existing€employment.€Ð ’â  ÐÌ6.€No€comments€on€the€submission€of€the€State€party€have€been€received€from€the€author.€Ð ^®  ÐÌ7.€In€order€to€substantiate€her€claim€under€the€Covenant€and€the€Optional€Protocol,€theÐ *z  Ðauthor€must€show€that€one€of€the€provisions€of€the€Covenant€has€been€violated€in€her€case.Ð ` ÐThe€only€articles€of€the€Covenant€which,€in€the€Committee's€view,€might€be€relevant€to€theÐ öF Ðconsideration€of€her€complaint€are€articles€12,€17,€23€and€26.€Ð Ü, ÐÌ8.1€After€careful€examination€of€all€the€material€before€it,€the€Human€Rights€Committee€isÐ ¨ø Ðunable€to€conclude€that€articles€12,€17,€23€and€26€of€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€andÐ ŽÞ ÐPolitical€Rights€are€applicable€in€the€case.€Ð tÄ ÐÌ8.2€The'€Human€Rights€Committee€bases€its€conclusions€on€the€following€facts:€Ð @ ÐÌ(a)€Article€12€states€that€no€one€shall€be€arbitrarily€deprived€of€the€right€to€enter€his€ownÐ  \ Ðcountry;€B€and€her€son€are€Polish€nationals;€the€provisions€of€article€12€therefore€do€notÐ òB Ðapply€in€this€case;€Ð Ø( ÐÌ(b)€Articles€17€and€23€provide€that€no€one€shall€be€subjected€to€arbitrary€or€unlawfulÐ ¤ô Ðinterference€with€his€family€and€that€the€family€is€entitled€to€protection€by€the€State;€theseÐ Š Ú Ðarticles€are€not€applicable€since,€except€.€for€a€brief€period€of€2€years€some€17€years€ago,€A.Ð p!À  ÐS.€and€her€adopted€daughter€have€not€lived€together€as€a€family;€Ð V"¦! ÐÌ(c)€Article€26€provides€that€all€persons€are€entitled€without€any€discrimination€to€the€equalÐ "$r# Ðprotection€of€the€law;€B€was€denied€entry€into€Canada€in€conformity€with€the€provisions€ofÐ %X $ Ðexisting€Canadian€law,€the€application€of€which€did€not€in€the€circumstances€of€the€presentÐ î%>!% Ðcase€give€rise€to€any€question€of€discrimination€on€any€of€the€grounds€referred€to€in€theÐ Ô&$"& ÐCovenant.€Ð º' #' ÐÌ9.€Since,€for€the€reasons€stated€above,€the€author's€claims€do€not€come€within€the€scope€ofÐ †)Ö$) Ðprotection€of€the€Covenant,€the€communication€is€"incompatible€with€the€provisions€of€theÐ l*¼%* ÐCovenant"€within€the€meaning€of€article€3€of€the€Optional€Protocol.€Ð R+¢&+ ÐÌThe€Human€Rights€Committee€therefore€decides:€Ð -n(- ЇThe€communication€is€inadmissible.€Ð ° ÐÓDÓ