ÿWPC  ³å>)c»Qw;­š«Cš³ô˜ýÌàòe¹89!®® ЕŒ^w#Éýhû`L%Û/~7“­i4ÄY' <žüdäÐÜ©å+4öÒú3L"ÖwíŠr~v8n°P°¹Þp÷+ö%zŠõ!ù³³'…µ'^©¼|`+X•‘2ÌÝŠgÕ“ôÿÛþ`áolF©×ôûüÖœÉÀêØ€{9Â2~Q‚¦]›ëËŠÙ,ͽòˆGHÊÌ*žÄe:¶®èËV¥˜} 8·¬_ýž/Á9$|DÇ_[Ààk*‰ù,<œ’æ~*á›÷ÎâXƒ¯p‹˜˜/Ɖ©ìlïzÛ‹ñZ­VñS—LÚÆîšdp{úþµ”QÒJ2B¸×pS7vJ›í€þ÷.ñ à`Ø»A„ˆ+H½U >Q®6¯]V 1÷‘e1Ü>Š|ãáÿSÍóðÞ ûh™”g l¥Ÿ_BÌÕS®þ—‰çµß,ˆuT‹…uÅ-O+ɺêð½ zx‰"àŠçk/DªÚsÄRSn@' B»˜Î¹¤~@C;j45ÞSs¦, †ú–mE ­Wq¼æÆò9À[%-“f¾ráñ›byZ>6z4ã·¥¹^²ZŽœ0Áa–U>BÌ€ 0nL 0iº 0Y# 0_| 0&ÛU6 %7 = 0ÆM #Á UNÔ Ô M" (& NN ^ P w\ 4` t mv ô\  `‹&Times New Roman' United Nations Human Rights Website - Treaty Bodies Database - Document - Jurisprudence - 4nt - Jurisprudence - "Angie Dituri"0Angie Dituri .   <ÿÿ:Default ParaÔ€ôôôÔÔ€XXXÔ< ÿÿ:Normal (Web)Ô S ÔÓ =jSÓÓ =jSÓ6ÿÿ4HyperlinkóóòòÔ ÿ ÔóóÔ  Ô<ÿÿ:FollowedHypeóóòòÔ  ÔóóÔ  Ô<qyÿÿ:HTML TypewriÔ€ôôôÔÔK€<þ6X9`(‹Courier NewKÔÔ  ÔÔ€XXXÔÔS€ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔÔ  Ô<þ6X9`(‹Courier New X#|x(žů$¡¡ÒÜ°ÒÒÜ°ÒÔ..ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ€ XrÈXX XÔÔ€XrÈXX XrÈÔÔÔ˜HP LaserJet 6P/6MP - Standard,ä,,,,,ä0(ÈhH  Z‹6Times New Roman Regular›vô* Äpì* ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀÝ ƒ ů!ÝÒÜ°ÒÒÜ°ÒÔ..ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ€ XvXX XÔÔ€XvXX XvÔÔÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôò òHUMAN€RIGHTS€COMMITTEEÐ ° ÐÌòòÔ_ÔCanepaÔ_Ô€Ô_Ôv.Ô_Ô€CanadaóóÐ |Ì ÐÌCommunication€No€558/1993Ð H˜ ÐÌ3€April€1997Ð  d ÐÌÔ_ÔCCPRÔ_Ô/C/59/D/558/1993Ð à 0 ÐÌÌVIEWSó óÐ ’â  ÐÌÌòòòòSubmitted€byóó:€Ô_ÔGiosueÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔCanepaÔ_Ô€[represented€by€Ms.€B.€Jackman]€Ð D”  ÐÌòòVictimóó:€The€author€Ð ` ÐÌòòState€partyóó:€Canada€Ð Ü, ÐÌòòDate€of€communicationóó:€16€April€1993€(initial€submission)óó€Ð ¨ø ÐÌÌòòÓ  ÓÓ  ÓThe€Human€Rights€Committeeóó,€established€under€article€28€of€the€International€CovenantÐ Zª Ðon€Civil€and€Political€Rights,€Ð @ ÐÌòòMeetingóó€on€3€April€1997,€Ð  \ ÐÌòòHaving€concludedóó€its€consideration€of€communication€No.€558/1993€submitted€to€the€HumanÐ Ø( ÐRights€Committee€on€behalf€of€Mr.€Ô_ÔGiosueÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔCanepaÔ_Ô€under€the€Optional€Protocol€to€theÐ ¾ ÐInternational€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights,€Ð ¤ô ÐÌòòHaving€taken€into€accountóó€all€written€information€made€available€to€it€by€the€author€of€theÐ p!À  Ðcommunication,€his€counsel€and€the€State€party,€Ð V"¦! ÐÌòòAdoptsóó€the€following:€Ð "$r# ÐÌÌÓ‚Óòòò òViews€under€article€5,€paragraph€4,€of€the€Optional€Protocoló óóóÐ Ô&$"& ÐÓÓÌÌ1.€The€author€of€the€communication,€dated€16€April€1993,€is€Ô_ÔGiosueÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔCanepaÔ_Ô,€an€ItalianÐ †)Ö$) Ðcitizen,€at€the€time€of€submission€of€the€communication€under€deportation€order€in€Canada.Ð l*¼%* ÐHe€claims€to€be€a€victim€of€a€violation€of€articles€7,€12,€paragraph€4,€17€and€23,€paragraphÐ R+¢&+ Ð1,€of€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights€by€Canada.€He€is€representedÐ 8,ˆ', Ðby€counsel.€Ð -n(- ЇòòThe€facts€as€submitted€by€the€authoróó€Ð ° ÐÌ2.1€The€author€was€born€in€Italy€in€January€1962;€at€the€age€of€five,€he€emigrated€to€CanadaÐ |Ì Ðwith€his€parents.€After€the€family€settled€in€Canada,€a€younger€brother€was€born,€who€isÐ b² ÐCanadian€by€birth.€The€author€has€extended€family€in€Italy,€knows€some€Italian,€but€does€notÐ H˜ Ðfeel€any€meaningful€connection€with€the€country.€Ð . ~ ÐÌ2.2€For€most€of€his€life,€the€author€considered€himself€to€be€a€Canadian€citizen.€It€was€onlyÐ ú J Ðwhen€he€was€contacted€by€immigration€officials€because€of€his€criminal€convictions€that€heÐ à 0 Ðrealized€that€he€was€a€permanent€resident.€Between€1978€and€1987,€the€author€was€convictedÐ Æ   Ðon€37€occasions,€mostly€related€to€breaking€and€entering,€theft,€or€possession€of€narcotics.Ð ¬ ü  ÐOn€several€occasions,€he€was€sentenced€to€imprisonment.€Counsel€notes€that€the€author'sÐ ’â  Ðconvictions€are€attributable€to€her€client's€addiction€to€heroin€which€he€developed€at€the€ageÐ xÈ  Ðof€13.€He€has€no€record€of€violence.€Counsel€notes€that€the€author€received€no€drugÐ ^®  Ðrehabilitation€treatment€while€in€prison,€but€on€his€own€initiative€attempted€in€1988€toÐ D”  Ðovercome€his€addiction.€He€was€able€to€remain€drug„free€until€1990,€when€he€becameÐ *z  Ðdepressed€over€his€immigration€situation€and€returned€to€drug€use.€In€1990,€he€was€againÐ ` Ðconvicted€of€possession€of€a€narcotic€and€imprisoned€for€18€months.€After€his€release€inÐ öF ÐJanuary€1993€he€resumed€living€at€home€with€his€parents€and€his€brother.€He€was€stillÐ Ü, Ðaddicted€to€heroin€and€committed€further€offences€shortly€after€his€release;€he€was€convictedÐ Â Ðon€further€charges€of€breaking€and€entering€and€was€serving€a€one„year€prison€term€at€theÐ ¨ø Ðtime€of€the€submission€of€the€communication.€Ð ŽÞ ÐÌ2.3€On€1€May€1985,€the€author€was€ordered€deported€on€the€basis€of€his€criminalÐ Zª Ðconvictions.€The€author€appealed€the€deportation€order€to€the€Immigration€Appeal€Board.Ð @ ÐThe€Board€heard€his€appeal€on€25€February€1988€and€dismissed€it€by€judgement€of€30€MarchÐ &v Ð1988.€On€26€April€1988,€the€author€petitioned€the€Federal€Court€of€Appeal€for€leave€toÐ  \ Ðappeal€of€the€decision€of€the€Immigration€Appeal€Board.€On€31€August€1988€leave€to€appealÐ òB Ðwas€granted.€The€Federal€Court€of€Appeal€heard€the€appeal€on€25€May€1992€and€dismissedÐ Ø( Ðit€by€judgement€of€8€June€1992.€On€1€October€1992,€the€author€applied€to€the€Supreme€CourtÐ ¾ Ðof€Canada€for€leave€to€appeal€of€the€decision€of€the€Federal€Court€of€Appeal.€The€SupremeÐ ¤ô ÐCourt€of€Canada€dismissed€the€application€for€leave€to€appeal€on€21€January€1993.€Thus,€noÐ Š Ú Ðfurther€domestic€remedy€is€said€to€be€available.€Ð p!À  ÐÌ2.4€It€is€stated€that,€after€deportation,€the€author€is€not€able€to€return€to€Canada€without€theÐ <#Œ" Ðexpress€consent€of€the€Minister€of€Immigration.€A€reapplication€for€immigration€to€CanadaÐ "$r# Ðwould€not€only€require€ministerial€consent€but€also€that€the€author€meet€all€other€criteria€forÐ %X $ Ðimmigrants.€Because€of€his€convictions,€the€author€would€be€barred€from€readmission€toÐ î%>!% ÐCanada€under€section€19€(2)€(a)€of€the€Immigration€Act.€Ð Ô&$"& ÐÌ3.1€On€2€June€1994,€counsel€to€the€author€informs€the€Committee€that€the€author€hasÐ  (ð#( Ðcompleted€his€prison€sentence€and€that€his€deportation€is€imminent.€She€requests€theÐ †)Ö$) ÐCommittee€to€request€the€State€party,€under€rule€86€of€its€rules€of€procedure,€not€to€removeÐ l*¼%* Ðthe€author€from€Canada€while€his€communication€is€under€consideration€by€the€Committee.Ð R+¢&+ ÐIt€is€submitted€that€the€author's€deportation€will€make€the€author's€rehabilitation€next€toÐ 8,ˆ', Ðimpossible€and€that€without€a€guarantee€from€the€Canadian€Government€that€the€author€willÐ -n(- Ðbe€allowed€to€return€to€Canada,€should€the€Committee€find€that€the€deportation€constitutesÐ ° Ða€violation€of€his€rights,€the€deportation€appears€to€be€irrevocable.€Ð –æ ÐÌ3.2€On€7€June€1994,€counsel€to€the€author€informs€the€Committee€that,€on€6€June€1994,€theÐ b² Ðauthor€has€been€removed€from€Canada€to€Rome,€Italy.€According€to€counsel,€the€author€hadÐ H˜ Ðbeen€informed€of€the€date€and€time€of€his€removal€a€few€hours€before€the€removal€was€toÐ . ~ Ðtake€place.€This€made€it€impossible€for€him€to€get€his€belongings€and€money€from€his€family,Ð  d Ðallegedly€contrary€to€normal€procedure.€Counsel€requests€the€Committee€to€request€the€StateÐ ú J Ðparty€to€return€the€author€to€Canada,€awaiting€the€outcome€of€the€examination€of€hisÐ à 0 Ðcommunication€under€the€Optional€Protocol.€It€is€submitted€that€the€author's€mental€healthÐ Æ   Ðwill€deteriorate€if€he€is€to€stay€in€Italy,€a€country€with€which€he€is€not€familiar€and€where€heÐ ¬ ü  Ðfeels€isolated,€and€that€this€will€cause€him€irreparable€harm.€Ð ’â  ÐÌòòThe€complaintóó€Ð ^®  ÐÌ4.1€The€author€claims€that€the€facts€as€described€reveal€violations€of€articles€7,€17€and€23,Ð *z  Ðparagraph€3,€of€the€Covenant,€as€interpreted€in€the€light€of€articles€9,€12€and€13€of€theÐ ` ÐCovenant.€He€claims€that€in€respect€of€articles€17€and€23,€the€State€party€has€failed€toÐ öF Ðprovide€for€clear€legislative€recognition€of€the€protection€of€privacy,€family€and€home€lifeÐ Ü, Ðof€persons€in€the€author's€position.€In€the€absence€of€such€legislation€which€ensures€thatÐ Â Ðfamily€interests€would€be€given€due€weight€in€administrative€proceedings€such€as,€forÐ ¨ø Ðexample,€those€before€the€Immigration€Appeal€Board,€he€claims€there€is€a€prima€facie€issueÐ ŽÞ Ðas€to€whether€Canadian€law€is€compatible€with€the€requirement€of€protection€of€the€family.Ð tÄ ÐThe€author€also€refers€to€the€Committee's€General€Comment€15€("The€position€of€aliensÐ Zª Ðunder€the€Covenant"),€according€to€which€aliens€may€enjoy€the€protection€of€the€CovenantÐ @ Ðeven€in€relation€to€entry€or€residence,€when€considerations€of€respect€for€family€life€arise.Ð &v ÐThe€author€furthermore€refers€to€the€Committee's€General€Comment€on€article€17,€accordingÐ  \ Ðto€which€States€have€a€positive€obligation€to€ensure€respect€for€the€right€of€every€person€toÐ òB Ðbe€protected€against€arbitrary€or€unlawful€interference€with€her€privacy,€family€and€home.€Ð Ø( ÐÌ4.2€The€author€argues€that€his€right€to€family€life€is€violated€by€his€deportation,€since€hisÐ ¤ô Ðdeportation€separates€him€from€his€nuclear€family€in€Canada,€consisting€of€his€father,€motherÐ Š Ú Ðand€brother,€a€household€unit€of€which€the€unmarried€author€has€always€been€a€part.€Ð p!À  ÐÌ4.3€The€author€further€submits€that€his€rights€to€"privacy"€and€"home"€have€been€violated.Ð <#Œ" ÐIt€is€argued€that€the€term€"home"€must€be€interpreted€broadly€and€that€it€should€encompassÐ "$r# Ðthe€community€of€which€an€individual€is€a€part.€In€this€sense,€his€"home"€is€said€to€beÐ %X $ ÐCanada.€It€is€further€argued€that€the€author's€right€to€privacy€includes€being€able€to€liveÐ î%>!% Ðwithin€this€community€without€arbitrary€or€unlawful€interference.€To€the€extent€thatÐ Ô&$"& ÐCanadian€law€does€not€protect€aliens€against€such€interference,€the€author€claims€a€violationÐ º' #' Ðof€article€17.€Ð  (ð#( ÐÌ4.4€The€author€further€argues€that€articles€17€and€23,€paragraph€1,€have€been€violated€in€hisÐ l*¼%* Ðcase,€because€the€interference€with€his€family€and€home,€resulting€from€his€deportation,€isÐ R+¢&+ Ðarbitrary.€According€to€the€author,€the€deportation€of€long„term,€deeply„rooted€andÐ 8,ˆ', Ðsubstantially„connected€resident€aliens€who€have€already€been€duly€punished€for€their€crimesÐ -n(- Ðis€not€related€to€a€legitimate€State€interest.€In€this€connection,€the€author€asserts€that€the€wordÐ ° Ð"arbitrary"€in€article€17€should€be€interpreted€in€the€light€of€articles€4,€9,€12€and€13€of€theÐ –æ ÐCovenant.€He€argues€that€"arbitrary€interference"€within€the€meaning€of€article€17€of€theÐ |Ì ÐCovenant€is€interference€which€is€not€"necessary€to€protect€national€security,€public€order,Ð b² Ðpublic€health€or€morals€or€rights€and€freedoms€of€others"€or€is€not€"consistent€with€otherÐ H˜ Ðrights€recognized€in€the€Covenant".€Ð . ~ ÐÌ4.5€The€author€contends€that€article€12,€paragraph€4,€which€recognizes€everyone's€right€toÐ ú J Ðenter€his€own€country,€is€applicable€to€his€situation€since,€for€all€practical€purposes,€CanadaÐ à 0 Ðis€his€"own€country".€His€deportation€from€Canada€results€in€a€statutory€bar€from€re„enteringÐ Æ   ÐCanada.€In€this€context,€it€is€pointed€out€that€article€12,€paragraph€4,€indicates€that€everyoneÐ ¬ ü  Ðhas€the€right€to€enter€"his€own€country",€not€just€his€country€of€nationality€or€birth.€It€isÐ ’â  Ðsubmitted€that€Italy€is€not€the€author's€own€country,€as€he€left€it€at€the€age€of€five€and€hisÐ xÈ  Ðentire€life€is€Ô_ÔcentredÔ_Ô€around€his€family€in€Canada€„€thus,€although€not€Canadian€in€a€formalÐ ^®  Ðsense,€he€must€be€considered€a€de€facto€Canadian€citizen.òò1óó€Ð D”  ÐÌ4.6€Finally,€the€author€contends€that€the€enforcement€of€the€deportation€order€amounts€toÐ ` Ðcruel,€inhuman€and€degrading€treatment€within€the€meaning€of€article€7€of€the€Covenant.€HeÐ öF Ðacknowledges€that€the€Committee€has€not€yet€considered€whether€the€permanent€separationÐ Ü, Ðof€an€individual€from€his€family€and€close€relatives€and€the€effective€banishment€of€a€personÐ Â Ðfrom€the€only€country€which€he€ever€knew€and€in€which€he€grew€up€can€amount€to€cruel,Ð ¨ø Ðinhuman€or€degrading€treatment;€he€submits,€however,€that€this€issue€should€be€consideredÐ ŽÞ Ðon€the€merits.€òò2óóÐ tÄ ÐÌ4.7€In€this€connection,€the€author€recalls€that€(a)€he€has€been€residing€in€Canada€since€the€ageÐ @ Ðof€five;€(b)€at€the€time€of€deportation€all€the€members€of€his€immediate€family€resided€inÐ &v ÐCanada;€(c)€while€his€criminal€record€is€extensive,€it€does€not€reveal€that€he€is€a€person€whoÐ  \ Ðposes€a€danger€to€the€public€safety€since€he€never€committed€crimes€of€violence;€(d)Ð òB Ðalthough€drug€rehabilitation€was€part€of€some€of€his€sentences,€he€received€no€such€treatmentÐ Ø( Ðwhile€imprisoned€and€was€actually€able€to€obtain€heroin€in€prison;€(e)€the€deportation€fromÐ ¾ ÐCanada€has€effectively€severed€all€his€ties€with€Canada;€and€(f)€the€prison€terms€for€hisÐ ¤ô Ðvarious€convictions€already€constitute€adequate€and€sufficient€punishment€and€theÐ Š Ú Ðdeportation€amounts€to€the€imposition€of€additional€punishment.€Ð p!À  ÐÌòòState€party's€comments€on€admissibilityóó€Ð <#Œ" ÐÌ5.€By€submission€of€21€July€1994,€the€State€party€informs€the€Committee€that€it€has€noÐ %X $ Ðcomments€to€offer€on€the€issue€of€admissibility€of€the€communication.€It€reserves€the€rightÐ î%>!% Ðto€make€submissions€on€the€merits€of€the€communication,€should€the€Committee€declare€theÐ Ô&$"& Ðcommunication€admissible.€Ð º' #' ÐÌòòThe€Committee's€decision€on€admissibilityóó€Ð †)Ö$) ÐÌ6.1€At€its€fifty„second€session,€the€Human€Rights€Committee€considered€the€admissibilityÐ R+¢&+ Ðof€the€communication.€Ð 8,ˆ', ÐÐ -n(- Ð6.2€The€Committee€noted€that€it€was€uncontested€that€there€were€no€further€remedies€for€theÐ ° Ðauthor€to€exhaust,€and€that€the€requirements€of€article€5,€paragraph€2€(b),€of€the€OptionalÐ –æ ÐProtocol€had€been€met.€Ð |Ì ÐÌ6.3€The€Committee€noted€that€some€of€the€author's€claims€under€article€17€of€the€CovenantÐ H˜ Ðconcerned€the€absence€of€legislation€in€Canada€to€guarantee€the€protection€of€the€family€lifeÐ . ~ Ðof€permanent€residents€against€whom€an€immigration€inquiry€is€initiated€with€a€view€ofÐ  d Ðordering€their€deportation.€The€Committee€recalled€that€it€cannot,€under€the€OptionalÐ ú J ÐProtocol€procedure,€examine€òòin€abstractoóó€whether€a€State€party€has€complied€with€itsÐ à 0 Ðobligations€under€the€Covenant.òò€3óó€To€the€extent€that€the€author's€claims€referred€to€the€failureÐ Æ   Ðof€the€Canadian€legislature€to€guarantee€the€family€life€of€non„Canadian€residents€in€general,Ð ¬ ü  Ðhis€communication€was€therefore€inadmissible.€Ð ’â  ÐÌ6.4€The€Committee€considered€that€the€author's€claims€that€his€deportation€makes€him€aÐ ^®  Ðvictim€of€a€violation€of€articles€7,€12,€paragraph€4,€17€and€23€of€the€Covenant,€should€beÐ D”  Ðconsidered€on€the€merits.€Ð *z  ÐÌ7.€As€regards€counsel's€request€under€rule€86€of€the€Committee's€rules€of€procedure,€theÐ öF ÐCommittee€found€that€the€author's€deportation€to€Italy€could€not€be€considered€to€constituteÐ Ü, Ð"irreparable€damage"€in€respect€of€the€rights€the€author€considers€violated€by€his€deportation.Ð Â ÐShould€the€Committee€find€in€favour€of€the€author€and€conclude€that€his€deportation€wasÐ ¨ø Ðcontrary€to€the€Covenant,€the€State€party€would€be€under€an€obligation€to€allow€the€authorÐ ŽÞ Ðto€re„enter€Canada.€Accordingly,€the€consequences€of€the€deportation,€however€disagreeableÐ tÄ Ðthey€might€be€for€the€author€in€his€situation,€did€not€cause€"irreparable€damage"€to€the€authorÐ Zª Ðin€the€enjoyment€of€his€rights,€which€would€have€justified€the€granting€of€interim€protectionÐ @ Ðunder€rule€86€of€the€Committee's€rules€of€procedure.€Ð &v ÐÌ8.€Accordingly,€on€13€October€1994,€the€Human€Rights€Committee€decided€that€theÐ òB Ðcommunication€was€admissible€insofar€as€it€appeared€to€raise€issues€under€articles€7,€12,Ð Ø( Ðparagraph€4,€17€and€23€of€the€Covenant.€Ð ¾ ÐÌòòState€party's€observations€on€the€merits€and€counsel's€comments€thereonóó€Ð Š Ú ÐÌ9.1€By€submission€of€21€December€1995,€the€State€party€argues€that€the€author's€allegationsÐ V"¦! Ðin€respect€to€article€7€of€the€Covenant€are€not€substantiated,€since€there€is€no€evidence€thatÐ <#Œ" Ðthe€author's€separation€from€his€family€poses€any€particular€risk€to€his€mental€or€physicalÐ "$r# Ðhealth.€The€State€party€argues€that€article€7€is€not€as€broad€in€scope€as€contended€by€theÐ %X $ Ðauthor€and€does€not€apply€to€the€present€situation,€where€the€author€does€not€face€aÐ î%>!% Ðsubstantial€risk€of€torture€or€of€serious€abuse€in€the€receiving€country.€The€author€has€notÐ Ô&$"& Ðshown€that€he€will€suffer€any€undue€hardship€as€a€result€of€his€deportation.€The€State€partyÐ º' #' Ðadds€that€the€author€is€not€absolutely€barred€from€returning€to€Canada.€Furthermore,€theÐ  (ð#( Ðauthor's€family€is€apparently€able€to€join€the€author€in€Italy,€as€indicated€by€the€author'sÐ †)Ö$) Ðfather€at€the€Immigration€Appeal€Board€hearing.€The€State€party€argues€that€the€question€ofÐ l*¼%* Ðseparation€from€family€is€rather€an€issue€to€be€dealt€with€under€articles€17€and€23€of€theÐ R+¢&+ ÐCovenant.€Ð 8,ˆ', ÐÐ -n(- ÐÔ_Ô9.2€The€State€party€argues€that€the€author€has€never€acquired€an€unconditional€right€toÐ ° Ðremain€in€Canada€as€his€"own€country"€and€cannot€acquire€such€status€by€virtue€only€ofÐ –æ Ðlong„term€residence€in€Canada.€The€State€party€contends€that€a€definition€of€"own€country"Ð |Ì Ðother€than€that€of€country€of€nationality€would€seriously€erode€the€ability€of€States€toÐ b² Ðexercise€their€sovereignty€through€border€control€and€citizenship€access€requirements.Ð H˜ ÐAccording€to€the€State€party€this€interpretation€is€supported€by€article€13€of€the€Covenant,Ð . ~ Ðfrom€which€can€be€inferred€that€there€is€no€class€of€aliens€that€enjoys€an€unconditional€rightÐ  d Ðto€stay€in€Canada.€Moreover,€the€State€party€argues€that€if€the€Committee€were€to€decide€thatÐ ú J Ðarticle€12€may€provide€a€right€to€permanent€residents€to€return€or€remain€in€their€country€ofÐ à 0 Ðresidence,€such€a€right€must€be€dependent€on€the€retention€of€legal€status.€The€author€thusÐ Æ   Ðhas€lost€this€right€when€he€lost€his€permanent€residence€status.€Ð ¬ ü  ÐÌ9.3€The€State€party€further€submits€that€the€rights€contained€in€articles€17€and€23€of€theÐ xÈ  ÐCovenant€are€not€absolute€and€are€to€be€balanced€against€societal€interests.€The€ImmigrationÐ ^®  ÐAppeal€Board€considered€all€relevant€factors€and€weighed€the€author's€rights€against€the€riskÐ D”  Ðthat€he€posed€to€the€Canadian€public.€The€Board€noted€that€the€author's€community€ties€wereÐ *z  Ðnot€particularly€compelling€and€concluded€that€the€individual€concerns€of€the€author€wereÐ ` Ðovertaken€by€the€larger€societal€interests.€The€length€of€the€author's€residence€in€Canada€wasÐ öF Ðduly€considered€and€weighed€in€the€balance.€Ð Ü, ÐÌ9.4€If€the€Committee€would€find€that€articles€12,€17€and€23€do€apply€to€the€author's€situation,Ð ¨ø Ðthe€State€party€argues€moreover€that€there€is€no€evidence€that€the€author€has€been€arbitrarilyÐ ŽÞ Ðdeprived€of€his€rights.€The€actions€taken€by€the€immigration€officials€were€authorized€byÐ tÄ Ðstatute€and€the€author€was€at€all€times€afforded€full€procedural€safeguards.€The€decisionÐ Zª Ðtaken€in€the€author's€case€was€the€result€of€a€legal€process€that€provided€him€with€a€fullÐ @ Ðhearing€and€complied€with€both€natural€justice€requirements€and€the€requirements€of€theÐ &v ÐCanadian€Charter€of€Rights€and€Freedoms.€Ð  \ ÐÌ10.1€In€her€comments€on€the€State€party's€submission,€counsel€for€the€author€maintains€thatÐ Ø( Ðthe€author's€deportation,€resulting€in€separation€from€his€social€and€familial€network€amountsÐ ¾ Ðto€cruel,€inhuman€and€degrading€treatment€within€the€context€of€article€7€of€the€Covenant.Ð ¤ô ÐIn€this€connection,€counsel€emphasizes€the€author's€dependency€on€heroin,€and€the€generalÐ Š Ú Ðrecognition€that€family€and€social€ties€are€crucial€aspects€of€successful€rehabilitation.€Ð p!À  ÐÌ10.2€As€regards€article€12,€paragraph€4,€counsel€explains€that€the€issue€is€not€whether€or€notÐ <#Œ" Ðthe€author€ought€to€be€considered€a€national€or€a€citizen€of€Canada,€but€whether€article€12Ð "$r# Ðapplies€to€his€circumstances.€In€this€context,€counsel€submits€that€States€have€imposed€limitsÐ %X $ Ðon€their€sovereignty€through€ratification€of€international€treaties,€such€as€the€Covenant.Ð î%>!% ÐCounsel€refers€to€the€òòÔ_ÔtravauxÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔprparatoiresÔ_Ôóó€which€give€the€impression€that€the€meaning€ofÐ Ô&$"& Ð"his€own€country"€was€left€undefined€by€the€drafters.€Because€of€this,€it€is€open€to€theÐ º' #' ÐCommittee€to€interpret€the€provision€in€a€manner€which€best€ensures€that€human€rights€ofÐ  (ð#( Ða€person€are€protected.€Counsel€is€of€the€opinion€that€the€State€party's€argument€that€if€thereÐ †)Ö$) Ðis€a€right€for€permanent€residents€under€article€12,€such€right€must€be€dependent€on€theÐ l*¼%* Ðretention€of€the€status,€negates€the€rights€under€article€12€entirely.€In€this€connection,€counselÐ R+¢&+ Ðargues€that€Covenant€rights€cannot€depend€on€the€internal€laws€of€the€State.€Ð 8,ˆ', ÐÐ -n(- Ð10.3€As€regards€the€balancing€of€interests,€counsel€acknowledges€that€the€author's€interestsÐ ° Ðwere€balanced€against€those€of€Canadian€society,€but€argues€that€under€Canadian€law€thereÐ –æ Ðis€no€recognition€of€individual€òòrightsóó€in€the€removal€process,€whereas€the€right€of€the€StateÐ |Ì Ðto€deport€is€recognized.€Counsel€further€submits€that€in€the€decision„making€process€familyÐ b² Ðintegrity€is€not€a€relevant€consideration,€but€only€economic€dependency.€Ð H˜ ÐÌ10.4€Counsel€states€that€for€all€practical€purposes,€the€author€is€barred€from€returning€toÐ  d ÐCanada,€since€the€Minister€would€not€give€his€consent€in€the€light€of€the€ImmigrationÐ ú J ÐAppeal's€Board€decision.€Furthermore,€the€author€cannot€apply€as€a€regular€immigrantÐ à 0 Ðbecause€of€his€criminal€record,€and€even€if€he€could,€he€would€not€qualify€for€admissionÐ Æ   Ðunder€the€selection€criteria.€Ð ¬ ü  ÐÌ10.5€As€regards€the€question€whether€the€interference€with€the€author's€rights€were€arbitraryÐ xÈ  Ðor€not,€counsel€argues€that€since€the€Immigration€Act€applied€to€the€author€is€inconsistentÐ ^®  Ðwith€the€provisions,€aims€and€objectives€of€the€Covenant€in€the€absence€of€recognition€ofÐ D”  Ðfamily€integrity€as€a€justiciable€issue,€the€decision€taken€in€the€author's€case€is€unlawful.€InÐ *z  Ðthis€connection,€counsel€also€argues€that€although€due€process€in€the€procedural€sense€existsÐ ` Ðit€does€not€in€the€substantive€sense.€Counsel€submits€that€in€the€circumstances€of€the€author'sÐ öF Ðcase,€in€particular€his€drugs€dependency,€the€interference€with€his€right€to€home€and€familyÐ Ü, Ðlife€was€arbitrary€and€constitutes€a€violation.€In€this€connection,€it€is€stated€that€the€author'sÐ Â Ðfamily€did€in€fact€remain€in€Canada€after€the€author's€deportation.€Ð ¨ø ÐÌòòIssues€and€proceedings€before€the€Committeeóó€Ð tÄ ÐÌ11.1€The€Human€Rights€Committee€has€considered€the€present€communication€in€the€lightÐ @ Ðof€all€the€information€made€available€to€it€by€the€parties,€as€provided€in€article€5,€paragraphÐ &v Ð1,€of€the€Optional€Protocol.€Ð  \ ÐÌ11.2€The€author€has€claimed€that€his€removal€from€Canada€constituted€a€violation€of€articleÐ Ø( Ð7€of€the€Covenant,€since€the€separation€of€his€family€amounts€to€cruel,€inhuman€andÐ ¾ Ðdegrading€treatment.€On€the€basis€of€the€material€before€it,€the€Committee€is€of€the€opinionÐ ¤ô Ðthat€the€facts€of€the€instant€case€are€not€of€such€a€nature€as€to€raise€an€issue€under€article€7Ð Š Ú Ðof€the€Covenant.€The€Committee€concludes€that€there€has€been€no€violation€of€article€7€ofÐ p!À  Ðthe€Covenant€in€the€instant€case.€Ð V"¦! ÐÌ11.3€As€to€the€author's€claim€that€his€expulsion€from€Canada€violates€article€12,€paragraphÐ "$r# Ð4,€of€the€Covenant,€the€Committee€recalls€that€in€its€prior€jurisprudence,òò€4óó€it€expressed€theÐ %X $ Ðview€that€a€person€who€enters€a€State€under€the€State's€immigration€laws,€and€subject€to€theÐ î%>!% Ðconditions€of€those€laws,€cannot€regard€that€State€as€his€own€country€when€he€has€notÐ Ô&$"& Ðacquired€its€nationality€and€continues€to€retain€the€nationality€of€his€country€of€origin.€AnÐ º' #' Ðexception€might€only€arise€in€limited€circumstances,€such€as€where€unreasonableÐ  (ð#( Ðimpediments€are€placed€on€the€acquisition€of€nationality.€No€such€circumstances€arose€in€theÐ †)Ö$) Ðprior€case€the€Committee€dealt€with,€nor€do€they€arise€in€the€present€case.€The€author€wasÐ l*¼%* Ðnot€impeded€in€acquiring€Canadian€citizenship,€nor€was€he€deprived€of€his€originalÐ R+¢&+ Ðcitizenship€arbitrarily.€In€the€circumstances,€the€Committee€concludes€that€the€author€cannotÐ 8,ˆ', Ðclaim€that€Canada€is€his€own€country,€for€purposes€of€article€12,€paragraph€4,€of€theÐ -n(- ÐCovenant.€Ð ° ÐÌ11.4€As€regards€the€author's€claim€under€article€17€of€the€Covenant,€the€Committee€observesÐ |Ì Ðthat€the€author's€removal€from€Canada€did€interfere€with€his€family€life€and€that€thisÐ b² Ðinterference€was€in€accordance€with€Canadian€law.€The€issue€for€the€Committee€to€examineÐ H˜ Ðis€whether€the€interference€was€arbitrary.€The€Committee€has€noted€the€State€party'sÐ . ~ Ðargument€that€the€decision€to€remove€the€author€from€Canada€was€not€taken€arbitrarily€as€theÐ  d Ðauthor€had€a€full€hearing€with€procedural€safeguards€and€his€rights€were€weighed€against€theÐ ú J Ðinterests€of€society.€The€Committee€observes€that€arbitrariness€within€the€meaning€of€articleÐ à 0 Ð17€is€not€confined€to€procedural€arbitrariness,€but€extends€to€the€reasonableness€of€theÐ Æ   Ðinterference€with€the€person's€rights€under€article€17€and€its€compatibility€with€the€purposes,Ð ¬ ü  Ðaims€and€objectives€of€the€Covenant.€The€separation€of€a€person€from€his€family€by€meansÐ ’â  Ðof€his€expulsion€could€be€regarded€as€an€arbitrary€interference€with€the€family€and€as€aÐ xÈ  Ðviolation€of€article€17€if€in€the€circumstances€of€the€case€the€separation€of€the€author€fromÐ ^®  Ðhis€family€and€its€effects€on€him€were€disproportionate€to€the€objectives€of€removal.€Ð D”  ÐÌ11.5€The€circumstances€are€that€the€author€has€committed€many€offences,€largely€of€theÐ ` Ðbreak,€enter€and€steal€kind,€and€mostly€committed€to€get€money€to€support€his€drug€habit.Ð öF ÐHis€removal€is€seen€as€necessary€in€the€public€interest€and€to€protect€public€safety€fromÐ Ü, Ðfurther€criminal€activity€by€the€author.€He€has€had€an€almost€continuous€record€ofÐ Â Ðconvictions€(except€for€a€period€in€1987„88),€from€age€17€to€his€removal€from€Canada€at€ageÐ ¨ø Ð31.€The€author,€who€has€neither€spouse€nor€children€in€Canada,€has€extended€family€in€Italy.Ð ŽÞ ÐHe€has€not€shown€how€his€deportation€to€Italy€would€irreparably€sever€his€ties€with€hisÐ tÄ Ðremaining€family€in€Canada.€His€family€were€able€to€provide€little€help€or€guidance€to€himÐ Zª Ðin€overcoming€his€criminal€tendencies€and€his€drug„addiction.€He€has€not€shown€that€theÐ @ Ðsupport€and€encouragement€of€his€family€is€likely€to€be€helpful€to€him€in€the€future€in€thisÐ &v Ðregard,€or€that€his€separation€from€his€family€is€likely€to€lead€to€a€deterioration€in€hisÐ  \ Ðsituation.€There€is€no€financial€dependence€involved€in€his€family€ties.€There€appear€to€beÐ òB Ðno€circumstances€particular€to€the€author€or€to€his€family€which€would€lead€the€CommitteeÐ Ø( Ðto€conclude€that€his€removal€from€Canada€was€an€arbitrary€interference€with€his€family,€norÐ ¾ Ðwith€his€privacy€or€home.€Ð ¤ô ÐÌ11.6€Finally,€the€Committee€is€of€the€opinion€that€the€facts€of€the€case€do€not€raise€an€issueÐ p!À  Ðunder€article€23€of€the€Covenant.€Ð V"¦! ÐÌ12.€The€Human€Rights€Committee,€acting€under€article€5,€paragraph€4,€of€the€OptionalÐ "$r# ÐProtocol€to€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights,€is€of€the€view€that€theÐ %X $ Ðfacts€before€it€do€not€disclose€a€violation€of€any€of€the€provisions€of€the€Covenant.€Ð î%>!% ÐÌ___________Ð º' #' ÐÌ*€The€following€members€of€the€Committee€participated€in€the€examination€of€the€presentÐ †)Ö$) Ðcommunication:€Messrs.€Ô_ÔNisukeÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔAndoÔ_Ô€and€Ô_ÔPrafullachandraÔ_Ô€N.€Ô_ÔBhagwatiÔ_Ô,€Mrs.€ChristineÐ l*¼%* ÐÔ_ÔChanetÔ_Ô,€Lord€Ô_ÔColvilleÔ_Ô,€Mr.€Ô_ÔOmranÔ_Ô€El€Ô_ÔShafeiÔ_Ô,€Mrs.€Elizabeth€Ô_ÔEvattÔ_Ô,€Messrs.€Ô_ÔEckartÔ_Ô€Klein,Ð R+¢&+ ÐDavid€Ô_ÔKretzmerÔ_Ô€and€Ô_ÔRajsoomerÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔLallahÔ_Ô,€Mrs.€Cecilia€Medina€Ô_ÔQuirogaÔ_Ô,€Mrs.€Ô_ÔLaureÔ_ÔÐ 8,ˆ', ÐÔ_ÔMoghaizelÔ_Ô,€Messrs.€Julio€Prado€Vallejo,€Martin€Ô_ÔScheininÔ_Ô€and€Maxwell€Ô_ÔYaldenÔ_Ô.€Ð -n(- Ї**€The€text€of€three€individual€opinions€signed€by€four€Committee€members€is€appended€toÐ ° Ðthe€present€document.€Ð –æ ÐÌ1/€€In€this€context,€counsel€refers€to€the€Committee's€decision€in€òòLovelace€v.€Canadaóó,€inÐ b² Ðwhich€the€fact€that€the€complainant€was€not€recognized€as€an€Indian€under€CanadianÐ H˜ Ðlegislation€did€not€prevent€the€Committee€from€considering€the€complainant€to€belong€to€theÐ . ~ Ðminority€concerned€and€to€benefit€from€the€protection€of€article€27€of€the€Covenant.€CounselÐ  d Ðalso€refers€to€the€judgement€of€the€European€Court€of€Human€Rights€in€the€òòÔ_ÔBeldjoudiÔ_Ô€caseóóÐ ú J Ð(55/1990/246,€26€March€1992).Ð à 0 ÐÌ2/€€Counsel€refers€to€the€separate€opinion€of€Judge€De€Meyer€of€the€European€Court€ofÐ ¬ ü  ÐHuman€Rights€in€the€òòÔ_ÔBeldjoudiÔ_Ô€caseóó,€in€which€it€was€stated€that€the€removal€of€the€applicantÐ ’â  Ðfrom€his€country€of€residence€and€the€severance€of€the€ties€with€his€wife€and€family€wouldÐ xÈ  Ðamount€to€inhuman€treatment.Ð ^®  ÐÌ3/€€See€òòinter€aliaóó€the€Committee's€decisions€with€respect€to€communication€No.€61/1979Ð *z  Ð(òòÔ_ÔHertzbergÔ_Ô€et€al.€v.€Finlandóó,€Views€adopted€on€2€April€1982,€para.€9.3)€and€No.€163/1984€(òòC.Ð ` Ðet€al.€v.€Italyóó,€declared€inadmissible€on€10€April€1984,€para.€6.2).Ð öF ÐÌ4/€€Case€No.€538/1993€(òòStewart€v.€Canadaóó),€Views€adopted€on€1€November€1996,€paragraphsÐ Â Ð12.2€to€12.9.Ð ¨ø ÐÌ[Adopted€in€English,€French€and€Spanish,€the€English€text€being€the€original€version.Ð tÄ ÐSubsequently€to€be€issued€also€in€Arabic,€Chinese€and€Russian€as€part€of€the€annual€reportÐ Zª Ðto€the€General€Assembly.]€Ð @ ÐÌÌÌÓ'ÓÓ  Óò òòòAPPENDIXóóó óÐ Ø( ÐÓþ…ÓÓ ÓÌÐ ÐA.€òòIndividual€opinion€by€Committee€member€Martin€Ô_ÔScheininÔ_Ô€òò(concurring)óóóóÐ Š Ú ÐÌWhile€I€share€the€Committee's€view€that€there€was€no€violation€of€the€author's€rights,€I€wishÐ V"¦! Ðto€explain€my€reasoning€for€such€a€conclusion.€Ð <#Œ" ÐÌAs€regards€the€alleged€violation€of€article€12,€paragraph€4,€I€have€difficulties€in€acceptingÐ %X $ Ðthe€majority€reasoning€in€communication€No.€538/1993€(òòStewart€v.€Canadaóó),€decided€priorÐ î%>!% Ðto€my€term€as€a€member€of€the€Committee.€In€my€opinion,€there€are€situations€in€which€aÐ Ô&$"& Ðperson€is€entitled€to€protection€òòbothóó€as€an€alien€(i.e.€a€non„citizen)€under€article€13€andÐ º' #' Ðbecause€the€country€of€residence€being€understood€as€his€or€her€"own€country"€under€articleÐ  (ð#( Ð12,€paragraph€4.€In€paragraph€11.3€of€the€present€case,€reference€is€made€to€the€Views€inÐ †)Ö$) ÐòòStewartóó€which,€in€my€opinion,€give€too€narrow€a€picture€of€situations€in€which€a€non„citizenÐ l*¼%* Ðis€to€be€understood€to€reside€in€his€or€her€"own€country".€Besides€a€situation€in€which€thereÐ R+¢&+ Ðare€unreasonable€impediments€on€the€acquisition€of€nationality,€as€mentioned€in€the€Views,Ð 8,ˆ', Ðthe€same€conclusion€must,€in€my€opinion,€be€made€in€certain€other€situations€as€well,€forÐ -n(- Ðinstance,€if€the€person€is€stateless€or€if€it€would€be€impossible€or€clearly€unreasonable€forÐ ° Ðhim€or€her€to€integrate€into€the€society€corresponding€to€his€or€her€òòde€jureóó€nationality.€JustÐ –æ Ðto€take€one€illustrative€example,€for€a€blind€or€deaf€person€who€knows€the€language€used€inÐ |Ì Ðthe€country€of€residence€but€not€the€language€of€his€or€her€nationality€country,€the€countryÐ b² Ðof€residence€should€be€interpreted€as€the€person's€"own€country"€under€article€12,€paragraphÐ H˜ Ð4.€Ð . ~ ÐÌAs€to€whether€there€was€a€violation€of€the€author's€rights€under€article€17,€I€likewise€concurÐ ú J Ðin€a€finding€of€non„violation.€In€addition€to€the€factors€mentioned€in€paragraph€11.5€of€theÐ à 0 ÐViews,€I€emphasize€that€the€deportation€of€the€author€did€not€in€itself€mean€that€his€contactsÐ Æ   Ðwith€his€family€members€in€Canada€were€made€impossible.€If€the€author,€aged€32€at€the€timeÐ ¬ ü  Ðof€deportation,€and€his€parents€and€brother€in€Canada€wish€to€maintain€those€contacts,€theyÐ ’â  Ðcan€do€so€by€correspondence,€by€telephone€and€by€the€other€family€members€visiting€Italy,Ð xÈ  Ðthe€country€of€origin€of€the€parents.€In€due€course,€the€author€may€also€apply€for€a€right€toÐ ^®  Ðvisit€his€family€in€Canada,€the€State€party€in€such€a€situation€being€bound€by€its€obligationsÐ D”  Ðunder€article€17€of€the€Covenant€not€to€interfere€arbitrarily€or€unlawfully€with€the€author'sÐ *z  Ðfamily.€Ð ` ÐÐ ÐMartin€Ô_ÔScheininÔ_Ô€[signed]Ð Ü, ÐÌÐ Ð[Original:€English]Ð ŽÞ ÐÌÌB.€òòIndividual€opinion€by€Committee€members€Elizabeth€Ô_ÔEvattÔ_Ô€and€Cecilia€Medina€Ô_ÔQuirogaÔ_ÔÐ @ Ðòò(dissenting)óóóó€Ð &v ÐÌFor€reasons€more€fully€expressed€in€a€separate€opinion€in€òòStewart€v.€Canadaóó€(No.€538/1993),Ð òB Ðwe€agree€neither€with€the€restrictive€way€in€which€the€Committee€has€interpreted€theÐ Ø( Ðexpression€"his€own€country"€nor€with€the€conclusions€of€the€Committee€set€out€in€paragraphÐ ¾ Ð11.3.€In€our€view€there€are€factors€other€than€nationality€which€may€establish€close€andÐ ¤ô Ðenduring€connections€between€a€person€and€a€country.€The€circumstances€of€the€authorÐ Š Ú Ðsuggest€that€he€has€such€connections€with€Canada.€We€are€therefore€of€the€opinion€that€theÐ p!À  Ðauthor€has€a€strong€claim€to€the€protection€of€article€12,€paragraph€4,€a€claim€which€shouldÐ V"¦! Ðbe€considered€on€its€merits.€Ð <#Œ" ÐÐ ÐElizabeth€Ô_ÔEvattÔ_Ô€[signed]€Ð %X $ ÐÌCecilia€Medina€Ô_ÔQuirogaÔ_Ô€[signed]Ð Ô&$"& ÐÌÐ Ð[Original:€English]Ð †)Ö$) ÐÌÐ ÐC.€òòIndividual€opinion€by€Christine€Ô_ÔChanetÔ_Ô€(òòdissentingóó)óóÐ 8,ˆ', ÐÐ -n(- ЇWith€regard€to€this€case€I€stand€by€the€comments€which€I€made€in€the€Stewart€case€(No.Ð ° Ð538/1993).€Ð –æ ÐÌIn€the€present€case,€paragraph€11.3€of€the€Committee's€views€assimilates€more€clearly€thanÐ b² Ðin€the€aforesaid€case€the€two€distinct€notions€referred€to€in€article€12,€paragraph€4,€of€theÐ H˜ ÐCovenant,€namely€the€notion€of€one's€"own€country"€on€the€one€hand€and,€on€the€other,€thatÐ . ~ Ðconcerning€the€arbitrary€nature€of€the€decision€to€"deprive"€(entry€or€re„entry).€Ð  d ÐÌThe€notion€of€"own€country"€does€not€fall€within€established€legal€categories€such€asÐ à 0 Ðnationality€or€temporary€or€permanent€resident€status;€it€is€a€term€that€refers€not€to€the€StateÐ Æ   Ðbut€to€a€geographical€place€whose€content€and€boundaries€are€less€precise,€and€hence,€in€theÐ ¬ ü  Ðabsence€of€any€reference€to€a€specific€legal€concept,€a€case„by„case€appreciation€of€the€termÐ ’â  Ðis€required.€That€appreciation€has€to€be€made€by€the€State€party€to€the€Covenant,€which€canÐ xÈ  Ðdefine€what€it€means€by€"own€country"€in€its€internal€legislation,€subject€to€observance€ofÐ ^®  Ðthe€other€provisions€of€the€Covenant,€which€obviously€excludes€any€"variable„geometry,Ð D”  Ðdiscriminatory"€definition.€If€the€State€were€to€engage€in€the€latter€exercise,€it€would€createÐ *z  Ða€situation€of€arbitrariness€„€arbitrariness€in€the€definition€of€"own€country".€Ð ` ÐÌHowever,€such€action€is€not€to€be€confused€with€another,€more€limited€situation€ofÐ Ü, Ðarbitrariness,€as€covered€by€the€Covenant€(art.€12,€para.€4),€which€in€this€instance€concernsÐ Â Ðthe€actual€decision€to€deport€a€person€or€to€deny€a€person's€right€to€enter€his€own€countryÐ ¨ø Ð("no€one€shall€be€arbitrarily€deprived€...").€As€worded,€paragraph€11.3€of€the€Committee'sÐ ŽÞ Ðviews€fails€to€make€this€distinction€and€intermingles,€on€the€one€hand,€the€criteria€forÐ tÄ Ðdetermining€whether€a€State€is€the€"own€country"€of€the€author€of€the€communication€and,Ð Zª Ðon€the€other,€the€entry€and€exit€requirements€for€aliens.€This€amalgam€leads€to€aÐ @ Ðsimplification€which€reduces€the€text€to€the€sole€criterion€of€nationality,€to€that€of€itsÐ &v Ðacquisition€or€withdrawal,€and€deportation€measures€(or€entry€rules)€are€never€arbitrary€whenÐ  \ Ðthey€comply€with€the€conditions€for€acquisition€or€withdrawal€of€that€nationality.€Ð òB ÐÌRendering€the€application€of€article€12,€paragraph€4,€of€the€Covenant€Ô_ÔindissociableÔ_Ô€fromÐ ¾ Ðnationality,€or€indeed€naturalization,€is€in€my€view€too€easy€a€solution€and€is€not€in€keepingÐ ¤ô Ðwith€the€actual€letter€of€the€text,€which,€had€it€been€intended€to€be€so€restrictive,€would€haveÐ Š Ú Ðemployed€appropriate€terms€relating€to€nationality,€a€legal€notion€that€is€easier€to€define.€TheÐ p!À  Ðdeliberate€use€of€a€vaguer€and€hence€broader€term€indicates€that€the€drafters€of€the€CovenantÐ V"¦! Ðdid€not€wish€to€limit€the€scope€of€the€text€in€the€manner€decided€by€the€Committee.€Ð <#Œ" ÐÐ ÐChristine€Ô_ÔChanetÔ_Ô€[signed]Ð %X $ ÐÌÐ Ð[Original:€French]Ð º' #' ÐÓC†Ó