WPC[! JG.tJ[)tG LJ;`v0n@!$l3=% ciYZ 4"hr@{@}>ܹDSwCqD2v/c*6#gbD,|}n)3I`U0 *K|;x7P|ss5Ox#o7#@NV/IwFl+8A"/vw_(vyNcVIϔΧెnfWjgfxW5QHB(DJUUa,2Eº92T={ GIJZrǤ ve~Wc6v}O /)=@vȪΜVfs|́Ah nN 0H Bhf0a2^ FwR4Vjy m{ B-faff; f a f a f a f a DE B>! 0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX(\$CEUS.,*+ (_2623  ..*D+D (_25   ," <DL,23  ..," <DL,   *5+5 (_24  ) <DL)23  ..) <DL)  *2+2 (_23 ` &<<DL&23  ..&<<DL& ` */+/ (_22  #DL#23  ..#DL#  *,+, (_21   DL 23  .. DL  *)+) (_20 h DDL23  ..DDL h *&+& (_19  L23  ..L  *#+# (_18   L23  .. L  *>> (_17  2( 4 <DL223  Ԁ2( 4 <DL2  *DD (_16   ," <DL,23  Ԁ," <DL,   *55 (_15  ) <DL)23  Ԁ) <DL)  *22 (_14 ` &<<DL&23  Ԁ&<<DL& ` *// (_13  #DL#23  Ԁ#DL#  *,, (_12   DL 23  Ԁ DL  *)) (_11 h DDL23  ԀDDL h *&& (_10  L23  ԀL  (## &_9   L23  Ԁ L  (>> &_8  2( 4 <DL223  2( 4 <DL2  (DD &_7   ," <DL,23  ," <DL,   (55 &_6  ) <DL)23  ) <DL)  (22 &_5 ` &<<DL&23  &<<DL& ` (// &_4  #DL#23  #DL#  (,, &_3   DL 23   DL  ()) &_2 h DDL23  DDL h (&& &_1  L23  L  &## $_   L23   L  6 4heading 1     2( 4 <DL2  UK XXX       US   2( 4 <DL2  <:Default Para\  `&Times New Roman6 |4heading 2     2( 4 <DL2  UK XXX       US   2( 4 <DL2    dTable_A8 18:i+003|xU)Hairline dTable_A \\R3'Letter\ \\R3'Letter\Table_ATable_ATable_ATABLE A....9Hairline!dxdx[ [d \!CEUS.,  _ hXX  CANADA#XbXh@#  _Follow-up-Jurisprudence  ЀActionbyTreatyBodies  CAT,A/60/44(2005)    ...     CHAPTERVI.CONSIDERATIONOFCOMPLAINTSUNDERARTICLE22OFTHE    CONVENTION   ...    D.Followupactivities    150.Atitstwentyeighthsession,inMay2002,theCommitteeagainstTorturereviseditsrulesof v procedureandestablishedthefunctionofaRapporteurforfollowupofdecisionsoncomplaintssubmitted p underarticle22. j 151.TheRapporteuronfollowupsubmittedanoralreporttotheCommitteeatitsthirty-thirdsession. ^ Thereportcontainedinformationreceivedsincethethirtysecondsessionfromeitherthecomplainantsor X theStatespartiesontheissueoffollowuptoanumberofdecisionsinwhichtheCommitteehadfound R violationsoftheConvention.Duringtheconsiderationofthisreport,theCommitteerequestedtheSpecial L RapporteurtoprovideinformationonfollowuptoalldecisionsinwhichtheCommitteehadfound F violationsoftheConvention,includingdecisionsinwhichtheCommitteefoundviolations,priortothe @ commencementoftheRapporteursmandate. : 152.Duringthethirtyfourthsession,theSpecialRapporteurpresentedareportonfollowuptoallthe 4 Committeesdecisions,includingnewinformationreceivedfromboththecomplainantsandStatesparties . ~ sincethethirtythirdsession.Thisreportisprovidedbelow. (!x   ""r TRO'3#Avery 12-294/295 Laser Ta LandscapeX3' Letter'3Letter LandscapeLaser Ta Landscape3'LetterT  Reportonfollowuptoindividualcomplaintstothe1CommitteeagainstTorture    ComplaintsinwhichtheCommitteehasfoundviolationsoftheConventionuptothirtyfourthsession   *&_%'d dd Xdd Xdd X..,\R,s\R,\R,~\R,&\R,\R,A \R,\\+  -%%   -wXXbCase#XbXw # 2%%# %% 2wXXbDateof   adoption#XbXwS # 2%%#!_  "%% 2wXXbNationalityof    complainant _   andcountryof ( x  removalif  A  applicable#XbXw # )%% %% )wXXbArticleof   Covenant _  violated )%%( x%% )#XbXw #wXXbInterimmeasures   grantedand _  Stateparty#XbXw#wXXbs ( x response#XbXw&# 2%%# A%% 2wXXbRemedy ;%%,! "%% ;#XbXw#wXXbFollow#XbXw?#wXXbup ?%%%,! "%% ?#XbXw#wXXbFurtheraction#XbXw # J%%;, "  %%%  J... )%% %% ) )%% %% ) 2%%# %% 2 2%%#! 3%% 2 )%% %% ) )%% %% ) -%%% %% - A%%2#    %%%  AwXXbESCE.,No.15/1994  ! CE.,ES.,=UKCE.,_Tahir_ԀHussain  " Khanv.CanadaCE.,UK.,UKCE., W # CE.,UK.,  )%% p $%% )"wwUKCE.,15Nov.  % 1994#w"wu#CE.,UK.,Ԁ )%% &%% )"wwUKCE.,Pakistanito  ' Pakistan#w"w-#CE.,UK.,L Q%%B (%%  @3@Q"wwUKCE.,3#w"w#CE.,UK.,4 P%%A? )3  @3 @%% P"wwUKCE.,Requestedand  * accededtoby  + theStateparty#w"w#CE.,UK., )%%W ,%% )UKCE.,TheStatepartyhas  - anobligationto  . refrainfrom W / forciblyreturning  p 0 _Tahir_ԀHussain 91 KhantoPakistanCE.,UK., )%%2%% )"wwUKCE.,Noinformationprovidedto  3 Rapporteur,however,duringthe  4 discussionoftheStatepartyreport W 5 totheCommitteeagainstTorturein  p 6 May2005,theStatepartystated 97 thatthecomplainanthadnotbeen 8 deported.#w"w#CE.,UK., -%%%{9%% -#XbXw#wXXbUKCE.,Requestfurther  : informationon  ; the W < complainant#XbXw#wXXbs  p = statusin 9> Canada#XbXw#CE.,UK.,  A%%2#?   %%%  A... )%%h@%% ) )%%hA%% ) 2%%#hB%% 2 2%%#!hC3%% 2 )%%hD%% ) )%%hE%% ) -%%%hF%% - A%%2#hG   %%%  AwXXbESCE.,"wwNo.133/1999 H CE.,ES.,2#w"wD#ESCE.,FalconRiov. OI CE.,ES.,ESCE.,CanadaCE.,ES., )%%hJ%% )ESCE.,"ww30Nov. K 2004CE.,ES.,p#w"w# )%%OL%% )ESCE.,"wwMexicanto M MexicoCE.,ES.,' #w"w9 # 2%%#ON%% 23 2%%#!O3%% 2  <( 4 <DLX<UKCE.,"wwRequestedand P accededtoby OQ theStateparty#w"w!#CE.,UK.,}! )%%hR%% )Relevantmeasures )%%S%% )#XbXw#<( 4 <DLX<UKCE.,"X XXXb"w X"XOn9March2005,theState#"X X"w1##"w X"Xparty T providedinformationonfollow#"X X"w##"w X"Xup. OU Itstatedthatthecomplainanthad hV submittedarequestforarisk 1W assessmentpriortoreturnto X MexicoandthattheState#"X X"w $#"w X"Xparty sY wouldinformtheCommitteeofthe <Z outcome.Ifthecomplainantcould U[ establishoneofthemotivesfor \ protectionundertheImmigration ] andProtectionofRefugee#"X X"w%#"w X"XsLawhe `^ wouldbeabletopresentarequest )y_ forpermanentresidenceinCanada. B` TheCommittee#"X X"wf&#"w X"Xsdecisionwouldbe  a takenintoaccountbythe !b examiningofficerandthe   complainantwouldbeheardorally   iftheMinisterconsideredit ]  necessary.Sincetherequestfor & e asylumhadbeenconsideredprior  . totheentryintoforceofthe   ImmigrationandProtectionof   Refugee#"X X"wE'#"w X"XsLaw,thatispriorto J June#"X X"wN)#"w X"X2002,theimmigrationagent R  wouldnotberestrictedtoassessing   factsafterthe#"X X"w)##XbX X"X##CE.,UK.,#<( 4 <DLX<UKCE.,"X XXXb"w X"Xdenialoftheinitial   requestbutwouldbeableto n  examineallthefactsand 7v  information,oldandnew,presented ?  bythecomplainant.Inthiscontext,   itcontestedtheCommittee#"X X"w*+#"w X"Xs   findinginparagraph7.5ofits [  decisioninwhichitfoundthatonly $c  newinformationcouldbe , consideredduringsuchareview.  #"X X"w,##XbX X"X +#"X XXXb"w X"XFinally,theStatepartycontested G theCommittee#"X X"w-#"w X"Xsviewthata O humanitarianremedydidnot  constituteaneffectiveremedyand  referredtopreviouscasesofthe k CommitteeinwhichtheCommittee 4s itselffoundsuchremediestobe < effective.#"X X"wt.##XbX X"X-# "X XhXb"w h"X5 #"X X"w50##XbX X"X0#"X XXXb"w X"XԀItarguedthattheriskof  torturecouldconstitutea  humanitarianmotiveandthatthe X  courtcouldberequestedtogrant !!` suspensiveeffectpendingsucha !)  decision.AccordingtotheState   party,atthetimeofthe   #"X X"w0##XbX X"X0#CE.,UK.,*<( 4 <DLX<UKCE.,"X XXXb"w X"X12considerationofthereporttothe ]  Committee,theauthoritieshadnot & e yetcompletedtheirreassessmentof  . theriskofreturn.#"X X"w3##XbX X"X2#CE.,UK.,2 -%%% %% -<( 4 <DLX<UKCE.,"X XXXb"w X"XUpdatetobe  requested#"X X"w5##XbX X"X4#CE.,UK.,4_ O     A%%2#    %%%  A... )%% %% ) )%% %% ) 2%%# %% 2 2%%#! 3%% 2 )%% %% ) )%% %% ) -%%% %% -3)'      %%% 3_______________ C  1󀀀Thepresentreportreflectsinformationuptotheendofthethirtyfourthsession. D  ...   5󀀀_S.V._Ԁv.CanadaUSCE.,,communicationNo.49/1996;CE.,US.,{8USCE.,_L.O._Ԁv.CanadaCE.,US.,8USCE.,,communicationNo.95/1997;CE.,US.,%9USCE.,R.K.v.CanadaCE.,US.,q9USCE.,,communicationNo.   42/1996.CE.,US.,9   "N  12 1TRX3'LetterO'3#Avery 12-294/295 Laser Ta Landscape3'LetterCANADA#XbX@# '3Letter LandscapeLaser Ta LandscapeT 21TRX3'LetterX3'Letter3'LetterCANADA#XbX@# 3'LetterCANADA#XbX@# T 2    CAT/C/SR.717(2006)   F COMMITTEEAGAINSTTORTURE  : Thirtysixthsession  4 SUMMARYRECORDOFTHE717thMEETING  .  Heldatthe_Palais_ԀdesNations,Geneva, (  onTuesday,16May2006,at10a.m. "  ...   CONSIDERATIONOFCOMMUNICATIONSUNDERARTICLE22OFTHECONVENTION    (agendaitem9)(continued)  50.TheCHAIRPERSONinvitedtheSpecialRapporteurtointroducethereportonfollowupactivities  (documentwithoutasymbol)relatingtotheCommitteesdecisionsoncomplaintssubmittedunderarticle  22oftheConvention.  51.Mr._MARIO_Ԁ_MENNDEZ_,SpecialRapporteuronFollowup,summarizedthecomprehensive  reportonrepliesreceivedwithregardtoallcasesinwhichtheCommitteehadfoundviolationsofthe  Conventionandonecaseinwhichithadnotfoundaviolationbuthadmadearecommendation.  52ItwasproposedtosendremindersrequestinginformationorupdatestothefollowingStatesparties x withregardtothespecifiedcommunications:Austria(_Halimi_Ԅ_Nedibi_Ԁ_Quani_,8/1991);Canada(_Tahir_ r HussainKhan,15/1994;Falcon_Ros_,133/1999);France(_Brada_,195/2003);Netherlands(A,91/1997); l  SerbiaandMontenegro(_Ristic_,113/1998;_Hajrizi_Ԁ_Dzemajl_Ԁetal.,161/2000;_Nikolic_,174/2000; f! _Dimitrijevic_,_Dragan_,207/2002);Spain(_Ecarnaci;n_ԀBlanco_Abad_,59/1996;_Urra_Ԁ_Guridi_,212/2002); `" Sweden(_Tharina_,226/2003;_Agiza_,233/2003);Venezuela(_Chipana_,110/1998). Z# 53.Inthecaseof_Dadar_Ԁv.Canada(258/2004),anote_verbale_ԀhadbeensenttotheStatepartyon13 N%  March2006expressingconcernthatthecomplainantwastobedeportedtoIrandespitetheCommittees H&!  decisionconcerningCanadasobligationsunderarticle3oftheConvention.Followingthecomplainants B'"! deportationon26March2006,asecondnote_verbale_ԀhadbeensenttotheStatepartyon31March2006, <(#" expressingconcernattheprecedentsetbyCanadainfailingtoabidebytheCommitteesdecisiononthe 6)$# meritsofacasesubmittedanddulyconsideredunderarticle22oftheConvention,askingtobeinformed 0*%$ bytheStatepartyofanymeasurestakentoensurethecom_plainant_ssafetyonarrivalintheIslamic *+z&% RepublicofIran,includingtheestablishmentofanymonitoringmechanismthroughtheStatepartys $,t'& consularoffices,andrequestinginformationinduecourseonthecomplainantswellbeing.Wasthe -n(' Committeeagreedonthedispatchofafurthernote_verbale_ԀtotheStateparty,deploringitsfailureto  complywiththetermsofarticle3,remindingitofitscorrespondingobligations,andrequestingittoestablish  amonitoringmechanismwherebyCanadianrepresentativeswouldhavedirectcontactwiththe  complainant?  54.Mr._CAMARA_expressedreservationsaboutthedispatchofsuchanote,whichmightestablisha   precedentwherebyStatespartieswouldconsidertheirobligationsunderarticle3limitedtoestablishinga   monitoringmechanismfollowingthedeportationofacomplainant.HethoughtthattheCommitteeshould   informtheStatepartythatithadviolatedarticle3andshouldincludethatinformationinitsannualreport.   55.Ms._GAER_saidthat,atthetimeofthecomplainantsdeportation,theStatepartyhadmaintainedthat t  thecomplainantwaswellandthattherewasthereforenoneedforamonitoringmechanism.Ithadnever n  beensuggestedthatsuchamechanismwouldfulfiltheStatepartysobligations,anditwasforthe h  Committeetodeterminewhatfurtherfollowupmeasuresshouldnowbetaken. b  56.TheCHAIRPERSON,endorsingtheviewsexpressedbyMr._Camara_,saidthatanywritten V communicationtotheStatepartyshouldstresstheneedtocomplywiththeCommitteesdecision.Other P issuescouldbediscussedverballyatameetingwiththerepresentativesofCanada. J 57.Mr._MARIO_Ԁ_MENNDEZ_agreedthatthenotetotheStatepartyshouldnotrefertopossible > followupmeasures.Issuessuchasmonitoring,compensationforviolationoftheConventionand 8 guaranteesoffuturecompliancecouldbediscussedatameetingwiththeStatepartysrepresentatives,at 2 whichMs._Gaer_ԀmightrepresenttheCommittee. ,| 58.Ms._GAER_saidshewishedtoplaceonrecordherconcernthat,forthefirsttime,aStatepartyhad  p refusedtocomplywithadecisionoftheCommitteeonthemeritsofacomplaint.Sheconsideredthe j mattertobeparticularlyserioussinceCanadahadalwayscooperatedveryactivelyintheimplementation d oftheConvention.TheCommitteewouldhavetodetermineitssubstantiveresponseatasubsequent ^ meeting.  X 59.TheCHAIRPERSONsuggested,inkeepingwiththeviewsexpressed,thatthenote_verbale_Ԁtothe !L Statepartyshouldseekameetingwithitsrepresentativeswhilemakingnoreferencetoanyfollowup "F measures. #@  60.Itwassodecided. %4!" ... &."#   '(#$ USCE., CAT,CAT/C/SR.749(2006)   COMMITTEEAGAINSTTORTURE  Thirtyseventhsession  SUMMARYRECORDOFTHEFIRSTPART(PUBLIC)*OFTHE749thMEETING   Heldatthe_Palais_ԀWilson,Geneva,   onWednesday,22November2006,at3p.m.   ORGANIZATIONALANDOTHERMATTERS(continued) z   Followupprocedures(CAT/C/37/R.2) n  1.  Mr._MARIO_Ԁ_MENNDEZ_,Rapporteuronfollowuptocommunications,reportingonfollow b  uptocommunicationsduringthethirtysixthandthirtyseventhsessions,drewattentiontodocument \  CAT/C/37/R.2.ItexplainedthestatusofcommunicationsonwhichtheCommitteehadrequested V additionalinformationorfurtheraction.FiveStatespartieshadnotrespondedtotheCommittee'srequests P forinformation.Thedocumentcontaineddetailedinformationonsixcommunications. J 2.  Withregardtothe_Dadar_Ԁv.Canadacase,itwasproposedthattheCommitteeshouldrequestthe > Statepartytoprovide,inresponsetotheconcernexpressedbyhiscounsel,informationonthe 8 complainant'swhereaboutsandwellbeing,ifnecessarywiththeassistanceoftheEmbassyinTehran. 2 CE.,US.,3Y... ,|   &v USCE., CAT,A/61/44(2006)   ...  L  M  CHAPTERVI.CONSIDERATIONOFCOMPLAINTSUNDERARTICLE22OFTHE  CONVENTION   ...   L  M  D.Follow-upactivities    L  M  75.Atitstwenty-eighthsession,inMay2002,theCommitteeagainstTorturereviseditsrulesofprocedure t  andestablishedthefunctionofaRapporteurforfollow-upofdecisionsoncomplaintssubmittedunder n  article22.Atits527thmeeting,on16May2002,theCommitteedecidedthattheRapporteurshall h  engage,interalia,inthefollowingactivities:monitoringcompliancewiththeCommitteesdecisionsby b  sendingnotes_verbales_ԀtoStatespartiesenquiringaboutmeasuresadoptedpursuanttotheCommittees \  decisions;recommendingtotheCommitteeappropriateactionuponthereceiptofresponsesfromStates V parties,insituationsofnon-response,anduponthereceipthenceforthofalllettersfromcomplainants P concerningnon-implementationoftheCommitteesdecisions;meetingwithrepresentativesofthe J permanentmissionsofStatespartiestoencouragecomplianceandtodeterminewhetheradvisoryservices D ortechnicalassistancebytheOfficeoftheHighCommissionerforHumanRightswouldbeappropriate > ordesirable;conductingwiththeapprovaloftheCommitteefollow-upvisitstoStatesparties;preparing 8 periodicreportstotheCommitteeonhis/heractivities. 2 L  M  76.Duringitsthirty-fourthsession,theCommittee,throughitsSpecialRapporteuronL  M  follow-upto &v decisionsL  M  ,decidedthatincasesinwhichithadfoundviolationsoftheConvention,includingDecisions  p madebytheCommitteepriortotheestablishmentofthefollow-upprocedure,theStatespartiesshould j berequestedtoprovideinformationonallmeasurestakenbythemtoimplementtheCommittees d Decisions. ^ 77.Inafollow-upreportpresentedtotheCommitteeduringthethirty-fifthsession,theSpecialRapporteur !R onL  M  follow-uptodecisionsL  M  providedinformationreceivedfromfourStatespartiespursuanttothisrequest: !L France;SerbiaandMontenegro(inrelationto113/1998,_Ristic_);Switzerland;andSweden.Thefollowing "F countriesdidnotrespondtotherequest:Austria;CanadaL  M  Ԁ(withrespectto_Tahir_ԀHussainKhan,15/1994)L  M  ; #@  theNetherlands;Spain;andSerbiaandMontenegro(inrelationto161/2000,_Hajrizi_Ԁ_Dzemajl_,171/2000, $: ! _Dimitrov_,and207/2002,_Dragan_Ԁ_Dimitrijevic_). %4!" L  M  ... &."# L  M  79.Duringthethirty-sixthsession,theSpecialRapporteurL  M  onfollow-uptodecisionsL  M  Ԁpresentednew '(#$ follow-upinformationthathadbeenreceivedsincethethirty-fifthsessionwithrespecttothefollowing ("$% cases:L  M  _Dadar_ԀvL  M  .L  M  CanadaL  M  Ԁ(258/2004),L  M  _Thabti_ԀvL  M  .L  M  TunisiaL  M  Ԁ(187/2001),L  M  _Abdelli_Ԁv.TunisiaL  M  Ԁ(188/2001)and )%& L  M  _Ltaief_Ԁv.TunisiaL  M  Ԁ(189/2001)andL  M  _Chipana_Ԁv.VenezuelaL  M  Ԁ(110/1998).L  M  ԀL  M  Representedbelowisa *&' comprehensivereportofrepliesreceivedwithregardtoL  M  allL  M  ԀcasesinwhichtheCommitteehasfound +'( violationsoftheConventiontodateandinonecaseinwhichitdidnotfindaviolationbutmadea , () recommendation.Wherethereisnofieldentitled Committeesdecisionattheendoftheprovisionof -)* informationinaparticularcase,thefollow-uptothecaseinquestionisongoingandfurtherinformationhas  orwillberequestedofthecomplainantortheStateparty.  L  M  ComplaintsinwhichtheCommitteehasfoundviolationsoftheConventionuptothethirty-fourth  session   ...   */0dd\Rs\Rs\R~\R~&\R&\RA \RA \\&_%'(#(#,|UU,HUU+  A7   AL  M  Stateparty    .$    .L  M  CANADAL  M  F<    FL  M  Case z    .$ t  .TahirHussainKhan,15/1994L  M  F<z    FL  M  Nationalityandcountryofremovalif n  applicable h   .$ b  .PakistanitoPakistanL  M  F<n   FL  M  Viewsadoptedon \   QG V @34652@QL  M  L  M  15November1994L  M  L  M   \   h^6V @34652  @ hL  M  Issuesandviolationsfound P  .$ J .Removal-article3L  M  F<P  FL  M  InterimmeasuresgrantedandStateparty D response >  .$ 8 .RequestedandaccededtobytheStatepartyL  M  F<D  FL  M  Remedyrecommended 2  .$ ,| .L  M  TheStatepartyhasanobligationtorefrainfromforcibly 2 returningTahirHussainKhantoPakistan.L  M  L  M   ,|   F<&v!  FL  M  DuedateforStatepartyresponse  p"  .$ j# .NoneL  M  F< p$  FL  M  Dateofreply d%  .$ ^& .NoneL  M  F<d'  FL  M  Statepartyresponse .$  X( .NoinformationprovidedtoRapporteur,however,  X) duringthediscussionoftheStatepartyreporttothe !R* CommitteeagainstTortureinMay2005,theStateparty !L+ statedthatthecomplainanthadnotbeendeported.L  M   "F,  F<#@-  FL  M  Authorsresponse $: .  .$ %4!/ .NoneL  M  F<$: 0  FL  M  Case &."1  .$ '(#2 .FalconRios,133/1999L  M  F<&."3  FL  M  Nationalityandcountryofremovalif ("$4 applicable )%5  .$ *&6 .MexicantoMexicoL  M  F<("$7  FL  M  Viewsadoptedon +'8  .$ , (9 .30November2004L  M  F<+':  FL  M  Issuesandviolationsfound -);  .$  .Removal-article3L  M   -)  F<  FL  M  L  M  InterimmeasuresgrantedandStateparty  response   .$  .L  M  L  M  RequestedandaccededtobytheStatepartyL  M  F<  FL  M  Remedyrecommended   .$   .L  M  RelevantmeasuresL  M  L  M  F<  FL  M  DuedateforStatepartyresponse     .$    .NoneL  M  F<    FL  M  Dateofreply     .$ z   .NoneL  M  F<   FL  M  Statepartyresponse t   .$ n  .On9March2005,theStatepartyprovidedinformation t  onfollow-up.Itstatedthatthecomplainanthad n  submittedarequestforariskassessmentpriortoreturn h  toMexicoandthattheStatepartywillinformthe b  Committeeoftheoutcome.Ifthecomplainantcan \  establishoneofthemotivesforprotectionunderthe V ImmigrationandProtectionofRefugeesLaw,hewillbe P abletopresentarequestforpermanentresidencein J Canada.TheCommitteesdecisionwillbetakeninto D accountbytheexaminingofficerandthecomplainant > willbeheardorallyiftheMinisterconsidersit 8 necessary.Sincetherequestforasylumwasconsidered 2 priortotheentryintoforceoftheImmigrationand ,| ProtectionofRefugeesLaw,thatispriortoJune2002, &v theimmigrationagentwillnotberestrictedtoassessing  p factsafterthedenialoftheinitialrequestbutwillbeable j  toexamineallthefactsandinformationoldandnew d! presentedbythecomplainant.Inthiscontext,it ^" conteststheCommitteesfindinginparagraph7.5ofits  X# decisionwhichfoundthatonlynewinformationcouldbe !R$ consideredduringsuchareview.L  M   !L% $"F&   $L  M  L  M  *34dd|UU|HUUH/0(#(#,|UU,HUU+  A7#@&#@ AL  M  L  M  Authorsresponse #@'  .$ $: ( .NoneL  M  F<#@)  FL  M  Case %4!*  .$ &."+ .Dadar,258/2004L  M  F<%4!,  FL  M  Nationalityandcountryofremovalif '(#- applicable ("$.  .$ )%/ .IraniantoIranL  M  F<'(#0  FL  M  Viewsadoptedon *&1  .$ +'2 .3November2005L  M  F<*&3  FL  M  Issuesandviolationsfound , (4  .$ -)5 . Removal-article3L  M  F<, (6  F_L  M  InterimmeasuresgrantedandStateparty   response   .$  .YesandStatepartyaccededL  M  F<  FL  M  Remedyrecommended .$  .TheCommitteeurgestheStateparty,inaccordance  withrule112,paragraph5,ofitsrulesofprocedure,to  informit,within90daysfromthedateofthetransmittal   ofthisdecision,ofthestepstakeninresponsetothe    decisionexpressedabove.L  M       F<    FL  M  DuedateforStatepartyresponse z    .$ t  .26February2006L  M  F<z   FL  M  Dateofreply n   .$ h  .22March2006,24April2006L  M  F<n   FL  M  Statepartyresponse b   .$ \  .TheStatepartyreferstothenoteverbalefromthe b  Secretariat,dated13March2006(seebelow). \  ЀHowever,itinformedtheCommitteethatitintendedtoL  M   V L  M  removeL  M  ԀL  M  theL  M  ԀL  M  complainantL  M  ԀL  M  toL  M  ԀL  M  IranL  M  ԀL  M  onL  M  ԀL  M  26March2006.L  M  ԀL  M  ԀIt P submittedthatitundertookareviewofthefileinlightof J theCommitteesdeterminationbutreiterateditsopinion D thatitdoesnotsharetheCommitteesviewthatthe > complainanthasestablishedthathewouldfacea 8 substantialriskoftortureifremovedtoIran.It 2 submittedthat,itisforthenationalcourtsoftheStates ,| partiestotheConventiontoevaluatethefactsand &v evidenceinaparticularcase.  p ItsubmittedthatthereferencemadebytheMinisterial d! Delegatethattheriskthatthecomplainantcould ^" representfortheCanadianpublicoutweighedtherisk  X# thathewouldfaceinIranwasmeantonlyasan !R$ alternativeargument.TheMinisterialDelegates !L% primaryconclusion,andtheoneadoptedbytheFederal "F& Court,wasthatthecomplainantwouldnotfacea #@' substantialriskoftorture. $: ( TheStatenotesthattheCommitteedoesnotrefertothe &."* complainantscredibility,despiteCanadahavingraised '(#+ theissueinitssubmissions,andacceptsmuchofthe ("$, complainantsevidencewithoutcredibleand )%- independentsupportingdocumentation.Althoughthe *&. Committeesuggestedotherwise,theStatepartysubmits +'/ thatithadquestionedtheallegationsmadewithrespect , (0 tothecomplainantsinvolvementwiththe_L  M  Canadian -)1 IntelligenceandSecurityServiceL  M  Ԁinitssubmissions.In  addition,theletter,dated4April2005,whichthe  complainantprovidedtodemonstratehispolitical  involvementwasprovidedL  M  afterL  M  ԀtheStatepartyhad  provideditssubmissions,andinanyeventcontainedno  elaborationofhisallegedactivities.Itrecallsthatthe   riskofbeingdetainedassuchisnotsufficienttotrigger   theprotectionofarticle3.   Finally,theStatepartyremindstheCommitteethatthis    isthefirsttimethatCanadawillnotfollowthis z   Committeesdecisiononthemeritsofacase. t  Nevertheless,itspositioninthismattershouldnotbe n  interpretedasasignofanydisrespectforthe h  Committeesworkinmonitoringimplementationofthe b  Convention. \  On24April2006,theStatepartyrespondedtothe P Rapporteursnote_verbale_Ԁof31March.Itreiterates J theMinistersfindingsandsubmitsthattherisk D assessmentwasreaffirmedbytheFederalCourton24 > March2006.Thus,itremainstheStatepartysposition 8 thatitcompliedfullywithitsobligationsunderarticle3. 2 SinceMr._Dadar_sreturn,theStatepartyinformsthe &v CommitteethataCanadianrepresentativespokewith  p thecomplainantsnephewwhosaidthatMr._Dadar_ j arrivedinTehranwithoutincident,andhasbeenstaying d withhisfamily.CanadahasnodirectcontactwithMr. ^ _Dadar_ԀsincehewasreturnedtoIran.Inlightofthis  X information,aswellasCanadasdeterminationthatMr. !R _Dadar_Ԁdidnotfaceasubstantialriskoftortureupon !L returntoIran,theStatepartysubmitsthatitwasnot "F  necessaryforCanadatoconsidertheissueof #@! monitoringmechanismsinthiscase.Itsubmitsfurther $: " thatMr._Dadar_ԀisnowwithinthejurisdictionofIran, %4!# whichisapartytothe_ICCPR_Ԁandboundtorespectthe &."$ rightsprotectedundertheCovenant,includingthe '(#% prohibitionoftortureandcruel,inhumananddegrading ("$& treatmentorpunishment.TherearealsoUnitedNations )%' specialprocedures,suchastheSpecialRapporteuron *&( Torture,whichwouldbeavailabletoMr._Dadar_Ԁif +') req_uired_.L  M   , (* $-)+  $_L  M  L  M  *56d d|UU|HUUH34(#(#,|UU,HUU+  A7 AL  M  L  M  Authorsresponse .$  .ThecomplainantscounselhascontestedtheState  partysdecisiontodeportthecomplainantdespitethe  Committeesfindings.Hehasnottodateprovided  informationhemayhaveontheauthorssituationsince  arrivinginIran.L  M     F<   FL  M  Actiontaken .$   .On13March2006,followingoralinformationfromthe    Statepartyon10March2006,thattheStateparty    intendedtodeportthecomplainantinthiscase,the    SpecialRapporteur,sentanoteverbaletotheState z   party.TheRapporteurexpressedconcernthat,despite t  theCommitteesdecision,theStatepartyintendedto n  deportthecomplainantbacktoIran.Onbehalfofthe h  Committee,theRapporteurremindedtheStateparty b  thatithasanobligationunderarticle3notto expel, \  return(L  M  refoulerL  M  )orextraditeapersontoanotherState V wheretherearesubstantialgroundsforbelievingthathe P wouldbeindangerofbeingsubjectedtotorture.In J viewoftheCommitteesdecision(para.8.9)that, D  substantialgroundsexistforbelievingthatthe > complainantmayriskbeingsubjectedtotortureif 8 returnedtoIran,theRapporteurinvitedtheStateparty 2 totakeactioninconformitywiththeCommittees ,| decision. &v Followingtheauthorsdeportationon26March2006, j theRapporteur,on31March2006,sentanothernote d verbaletotheStateparty,onbehalfoftheCommittee, ^ inwhichtheRapporteurexpressedgraveconcernatthe  X Statepartysrefusaltocomplywithitsdecision,and !R  acknowledged,interaliaL  M  ,L  M  Ԁthatthiswasthefirsttime,to !L! theCommitteesknowledge,thatanyStateparty "F" deportedacomplainantfollowingaconclusionbythis #@# Committeethatsuchadeportationwouldamounttoa $: $ violationofarticle3.TheRapporteurexpressed %4!% concernnotonlyforthecomplainantinthiscasebutalso &."& deepconcernfortheglobalconsequencesoftheState '(#' partysactionwithrespecttocompliancewiththe ("$( Committeesdecisionsunderarticle22.The )%) Rapporteurrequestedtobeinformedofanymeasures *&* takenbytheStatepartytoensurethecomplainants +'+ safetyonarrivalintheIslamicRepublicofIran,including , (, theestablishmentofanymonitoringmechanism_through -)- theStatepartysconsularoffices,orotherproceduralor  substantiveguarantees,andalsorequestedinformation  induecourseonthecomplainantsstateofwell-being.L  M    $   $L  M  L  M  *78dd|UU|HUUH56(#(#,|UU,HUU+  A7 AL  M  L  M  Committeesdecision .$  .Duringtheconsiderationofthefollow-upatits  thirty-sixthsession,theCommitteedeploredtheState   partysfailuretoabidebyitsobligationsunderarticle3,   andfoundthattheStatepartyviolateditsobligations    underarticle3L  M  Ԁnotto, expel,return(L  M  refoulerL  M  )or    extraditeapersontoanotherStatewherethereare z   substantialgroundsforbelievingthathewouldbein t  dangerofbeingsubjectedtotorture.L  M  L  M   n  $h   $...CE.,US.,_ \    V USCE., CAT,CAT/C/SR.776(2007)   COMMITTEEAGAINSTTORTURE  Thirty-eighthsession  SUMMARYRECORDOFTHEFIRSTPART(PUBLIC)OFTHE776thMEETING   Heldatthe_Palais_ԀWilson,Geneva,   onTuesday,15May2007,at3p.m.   ... t  ORGANIZATIONALANDOTHERMATTERS(agendaitem3) n  Followupprocedures(CAT/C/38/R.1) b  1.TheCHAIRPERSONinvitedtheCommitteetoconsiderthereportofonfollowuptoindividual V communicationsascontainedindocumentCAT/C/38/R.1. P 2.Mr.SCHMIDT,PetitionsUnit,introducingthereport,saidthatitdealtwithfollowupactivitiessince D theendoftheCommitteesprevioussession,24November2006... > ... 8 4.Mr._MARIO_Ԁ_MENNDEZ_,Rapporteuronfollowuptocommunications,calledtheCommittees 2 attentionto_Falc;n_Ԁ_Ri;s_Ԁv.Canada,inwhichtheCommitteehad,in2004,foundaviolationofArticle3of ,| theConventionandhadrequestedtheStatepartytotakeinterimmeasures.Canadahadreportedon9 &v March2005thatthecomplainanthadlodgedanewcomplaintwiththecompetentauthoritiesseekingan  p assessmentoftheriskthathemightbetorturedifhewerereturnedtoMexico.On5February2007,the j complainanthadtransmittedtotheCommitteetheresultsofthatinquiry,indicatingthathisrequesthadbeen d rejectedandthathehadtoleavetheterritoryoftheStateparty.Accordingly,theCommitteecouldaskthe ^ complainanttoprovidecurrentinformationonhissituationandrequesttheStatepartytoprovideupdated  X informationonthecase. !R &  5.Withregardtothe_Dadar_Ԁv.Canadacase,whichwasnotmentionedinthedocumentunder "F consideration,theStatepartyhadsentthecomplainantbacktohiscountryoforiginafterconcluding, #@  contrarytotheCommitteesobservationsof23November2005thathehadnotdemonstratedthatheran $: ! arealriskofbeingtorturedifhewerereturned.TheCommitteecouldthereforerequestinformationfrom %4!" theStatepartyregardingthecomplainantscurrentsituation.'! &."# ... '(#$ 14.TheCHAIRPERSONsaidthatifheheardnoobjectionhewouldtakeitthattheCommitteewished ("$% toadopttheproposalsoftheRapporteur )%& 15.Itwassodecided. +'( ... , () CE.,US.,  -)*  CAT,CAT/C/SR.801/Add.1(2007)   COMMITTEEAGAINSTTORTURE  Thirty-ninthsession  SUMMARYRECORDOFTHESECONDPART(PUBLIC)*OFTHE801stMEETING   Heldatthe_Palais_ԀWilson,Geneva,   onMonday,19November2007,at12.35p.m.   ... z   CONSIDERATIONOFCOMMUNICATIONSUNDERARTICLE22OFTHECONVENTION t  (continued) n  ... h  Follow-upondecisionsadoptedunderarticle22oftheConvention(CAT/C/39/R.1) b  1.  TheCHAIRPERSONinvitedtheSpecialRapporteuronFollow-uptointroducethereporton V follow-upactivities(CAT/C/39/R.1)relatingtotheCommittee'sdecisionsonindividualcomplaints P submittedunderarticle22oftheConvention. J 2.  Mr._MARIO_Ԁ_MENNDEZ_,SpecialRapporteuronFollow-up,summarizedthecomprehensive > reportonrepliesreceivedincasesinwhichtheCommitteehadfoundviolationsoftheConvention. 8 ... 2 7.  Inthecaseof_Falc;n_ԀRiosv.Canada(133/1999)theCommitteedidnotneedtotakefurther ,| actionsincetheCanadianGovernmenthadsaidthatitdidnotintendtoimplementtheordertoreturnthe &v complainanttoMexico.However,hesuggestedthatalettershouldbesenttotheCanadianGovernment  p askingitforanynewinformationconcerningthecase,andremindingitthat,inaccordancewiththe j Committee'sdecision,thecomplainantmustnotbereturnedtoMexicoashewasstillcoveredbythe d interimmeasuresgrantedbytheGovernment. ^ 8.  Withregardto_Mostafa_Ԁ_Dadar_Ԁv.Canada(258/2004)hesuggestedthattheCommitteeshould !R complywiththecomplainant'srequestnottoremovethecasefromthefollow-upprocedure,despitethe !L Stateparty'srequesttothecontrary.Canadahadinfactshownalackofgoodfaithinrenegingonits "F undertakingtoapplyinterimmeasures.TheCommitteeshouldthereforerequestinformationfromtheState #@  partyonthecomplainant'ssituation. $: ! 9.  TheCHAIRPERSONsuggestedthatthecasebekeptopenuntiltheCommittee'sfortiethsession. &."# Inhisview,therewereinsufficientgroundsforkeepingitopenbeyondthen. '(#$ 10.  Mr.WANG_Xuexian_soughtclarificationofthecounsel'sassertionthathisclientwaspersonanon )%& gratainIran.Whatwasmeantbythat?Andwasitcounsel'svieworthatoftheIranianGovernment? *&' 11.  Mr._MARIO_Ԁ_MENNDEZ_saidthattheexpressionhadbeenusedincounsel'scasefileand , () reproduced.Theexactmeaningwasunclear. -)* ЇThemeetingroseat1p.m.     USCE., CAT,A/62/44(2007)   ...  VI.CONSIDERATIONOFCOMPLAINTSUNDERARTICLE22OFTHECONVENTION  ...    ComplaintsinwhichtheCommitteehasfoundviolationsoftheConventionuptothethirtyeighth   session  z   CE.,US.,#*9:dd|UU|HUUH78(#(#, RR,RR+  (t t  (...  t   ?5t   ? Stateparty  6   CANADA ?56   ?Case  H  TahirHussainKhan,15/1994 ?5H   ?Nationalityandcountryofremovalif   applicable   PakistanitoPakistan ?5   ?Viewsadoptedon  v 15November1994 ?5v  ?Issuesandviolationsfound  8 Removal-article3 ?58  ?InterimmeasuresgrantedandStateparty J response  D RequestedandaccededtobytheStateparty ?5J  ?Remedyrecommended   TheStatepartyhasanobligationtorefrainfrom  forciblyreturning_Tahir_ԀHussainKhantoPakistan. ?5  ?DuedateforStatepartyresponse  r None ?5r  ?Dateofreply  4!  None ?54!!  ?Statepartyresponse  "F" NoinformationprovidedtoRapporteur,however "F# duringthediscussionoftheStatepartyreporttothe #@$ CommitteeagainstTortureinMay2005,theState $: % partystatedthatthecomplainanthadnotbeen %4!& deported. ?5&."'  ?Complainantsresponse  (#( None ?5(#)  ?Case  b*%* FalconRios,133/1999 ?5b*%+  ?Nationalityandcountryofremovalif $,t', applicable  -n(-  MexicantoMexico ?5$,t'.  ?Viewsadoptedon    30November2004 ?5  ?Issuesandviolationsfound  r Removal-article3 ?5r  ?InterimmeasuresgrantedandStateparty 4 response  . ~ RequestedandaccededtobytheStateparty ?54  ?Remedyrecommended   @ Relevantmeasures ?5 @   ?DuedateforStatepartyresponse     None ?5    ?Dateofreply  t  None ?5t   ?Statepartyresponse  6  On9March2005,theStatepartyprovided 6  informationonfollow-up.Itstatedthatthecomplainant 0  hadsubmittedarequestforariskassessmentpriorto *z  returntoMexicoandthattheStatepartywillinform $t theCommitteeoftheoutcome.Ifthecomplainantcan n establishoneofthemotivesforprotectionunderthe h ImmigrationandProtectionofRefugeesLaw,hewill b beabletopresentarequestforpermanentresidence  \ inCanada.TheCommitteesdecisionwillbetaken V intoaccountbytheexaminingofficerandthe P complainantwillbeheardorallyiftheMinister J considersitnecessary.Sincetherequestforasylum D wasconsideredpriortotheentryintoforceofthe > ImmigrationandProtectionofRefugeesLaw,thatis 8 priortoJune2002,theimmigrationagentwillnotbe 2 restrictedtoassessingfactsafterthedenialoftheinitial , requestbutwillbeabletoexamineallthefactsand & informationoldandnewpresentedbythecomplainant.    Inthiscontext,itconteststheCommitteesfindingin !! paragraph7.5ofitsdecisionwhichfoundthatonly "" newinformationcouldbeconsideredduringsucha ## review. ?5$ $  ?Complainantsresponse  z&!% On5February2007,thecomplainantforwardedthe z&!& Committeeacopyoftheresultsofhisriskassessment, t'"' inwhichhisrequestwasdeniedandhewasaskedto n(#( leavetheStateparty.Nofurtherinformationwas h)$) provided. ?5b*%*  ?Case  $,t'+  _Dadar_,258/2004 ?5$,t',  ?Nationalityandcountryofremovalif   applicable   IraniantoIran ?5  ?Viewsadoptedon  l 3November2005 ?5l  ?Issuesandviolationsfound  . ~ Removal-article3 ?5. ~  ?InterimmeasuresgrantedandStateparty  @ response   :  YesandStatepartyacceded ?5 @   ?Remedyrecommended     TheCommitteeurgestheStateparty,inaccordance    withrule112,paragraph5,ofitsrulesofprocedure,   toinformit,within90daysofthedateofthe   transmittalofthisdecision,ofthestepstakenin   responsetothedecisionexpressedabove. ?5   ?DuedateforStatepartyresponse  V 26February2006 ?5V  ?Dateofreply  h Latestreply5April2007(Hadpreviouslyresponded h on22March2006and24April2006seeannual b reportA/61/44and9August2006). ?5 \  ?Statepartyresponse   TheCommitteewillrecallthattheStatepartyremoved  thecomplainanttoIranon26March2006despitea  findingofaviolationoftheConvention.Initsresponse  of24April2006,itstatedthatsincehisreturna   Canadianrepresentativehadspokenwiththe  complainantsnephewwhosaidthatMr._Dadar_Ԁhad  arrivedinTehranwithoutincident,andwasstaying  withhisfamily.TheStatepartyhadnodirectcontact  withhimsincehewasreturnedtoIran.Inlightofthis    information,aswellasCanadasdeterminationthathe !! didnotfaceasubstantialriskoftortureuponreturnto "" Iran,theStatepartysubmitsthatitwasnotnecessary ## forittoconsidertheissueofmonitoringmechanismsin $$ thiscase.(ForafullaccountoftheStatepartys % % responseseeannualreportA/61/44.) z&!& On9August2006,theStatepartyinformedthe n(#( Committeethaton16May2006,thecomplainant h)$) cametotheCanadianEmbassyinTehrantopursue b*%* certainpersonalandadministrativeissuesinCanada \+&+ unrelatedtotheallegationsbeforetheCommittee.He V,', didnotcomplainofanyill-treatmentinIrannormake  anycomplaintsabouttheIranianauthorities.Asthe  complainantsvisitconfirmedpreviousinformation  receivedfromhisnephew,theCanadianauthorities  requestedthatthismatterberemovedfrom  considerationunderthefollowupprocedure.   On5April2007,theStatepartyrespondedto   counselscommentsof24June2006.Itstatedthatit    hadnoknowledgeofthecomplainantsstateofwell z   beingandthathisfurtherquestioningbytheIranian t  authoritieswouldhavebeenduetothediscoveryof n  theCommitteesdecision.TheStatepartyregardsthis h  decisionasan interveningfactor,subsequenttohis b  returnthatitcouldnothavetakenintoaccountatthe \  timeofhisreturn.Inaddition,thecomplainants V concernsdonotdiscloseanycomplaintthat,wereitto P bemadetotheCommittee,couldgiverisetoa J violationofarightundertheConvention.Questioning D bytheauthoritiesdoesnotamounttotorture.Inany > event,hisfearoftortureduringquestioningis 8 speculativeandhypothetical.GivenIransratification 2 oftheInternationalCovenantonCivilandPolitical ,| Rightsandthepossibilityforthecomplainanttouse &v UnitedNationsspecialproceduremechanismssuchas  p theSpecialRapporteurontorture,itconsidersthe j UnitedNationsbetterplacedtomakeenquiriesabout d thecomplainantswellbeing. ?5^  ?Complainantsresponse    ThecomplainantscounselhascontestedtheState   partysdecisiontodeportthecomplainantdespitethe ! Committeesfindings.Hehasnottodateprovided "  informationhemayhaveontheauthorssituationsince #! arrivinginIran. $ " Thecomplainantscounselstatesthaton24June &!$ 2006,heheardfromthecomplainantwhoinformed '"% himthattheIranianauthoritieshaddeliveredacopyof (#& theCommitteesdecisiontohishomeandhad )$' requestedhisattendanceforquestioning.Hewasvery *%( worriedoverthetelephoneandcounselhasnotheard +&) fromhimsince.Inaddition,hestatesthatMr._Dadar_Ԁis ,'* personanongratainIran.Hecannotworkortravel  andisunabletoobtainthemedicaltreatmenthehad  receivedinCanadatotreathiscondition. ?5  ?Actiontaken  f SeetheCommitteesannualreport(A/61/44)foran f accountofthecontentsofnotes_verbales_Ԁsentfromthe `  SpecialRapporteurtotheStateparty. ?5Z   ?Committeesdecision   l Duringtheconsiderationofthefollow-upatits  l  thirty-sixthsession,theCommitteedeploredtheState  f  partysfailuretoabidebyitsobligationsunderarticle `  3,andfoundthattheStatepartyviolatedits  Z  obligationsunderarticle3notto, expel,return T  (_refouler_)orextraditeapersontoanotherStatewhere N  therearesubstantialgroundsforbelievingthathe H  wouldbeindangerofbeingsubjectedtotorture.The B dialogueisongoing.-#!<  ! -...     USCE., CAT,CAT/C/SR.817(2008)   COMMITTEEAGAINSTTORTURE  Fortiethsession  SUMMARYRECORD(PARTIAL)*OFTHE817thMEETING   Heldatthe_Palais_ԀWilson,Geneva,   onFriday,2May2008,at3p.m.   Follow-upondecisionsadoptedunderarticle22oftheConvention(continued)(CAT/C/40/R.1) t  1.TheCHAIRPERSONinvitedtheCommitteetoresumeitsconsiderationofthereportonfollow-up h  activities(CAT/C/40/R.1)relatingtotheCommittee'sdecisionsonindividualcomplaintssubmittedunder b  article22oftheConvention. \  2.Mr._MARIO_Ԁ_MENNDEZ_(SpecialRapporteuronFollow-up),referringtothecaseof_Falc;n_ P Riosv.Canada(communicationNo.133/1999),proposedthatasentenceshouldbeaddedinthelast J paragraphreflectingtheCommittee'sdecisiontotheeffectthatthecomplainant'sfailuretoreplycouldbe D interpretedasawishtodiscontinuethecase. > 3.TheCHAIRPERSONsaidhetookitthattheCommitteewishedtoadopttheproposalbyMr. 2 _Mario_Ԁ_Menndez_. ,| 4.Itwassodecided.  p 5.Mr._MARIO_Ԁ_MENNDEZ_drewattentiontoanerrorintheinformationprovidedonthe_Bachan_ d Singh_Sogi_Ԁv.Canadacase(communicationNo.297/2006):India,thecountrytowhichthecomplainant ^ hadbeenreturned,contrarytotheCommittee'srecommendation,hadsignedbutnotratifiedthe  X Convention. !R 6.Ms._GAER_saidthateventhoughIndiahadnotratifiedtheConvention,itshouldnotcontraveneits "F provisions.Perhapsthatcouldbereflectedsomehowintheparagraphonfurtheractiontakenorrequired. #@  7.Mr._GALLEGOS_Ԁ_CHIRIBOGA_endorsedMs._Gaer_'ssuggestion.Furthermore,hedidnotconsider %4!" itsufficientfortheCommitteemerelytowelcometheStateparty's(Canada's)adoptionofthenewlaw. &."# CanadahadfailedtocomplywiththeCommittee'srecommendedremedyandshouldbeexpectedtodo '(#$ morebyprovidingreparationinlinewiththeConvention. ("$% 8.Mr._MARIO_Ԁ_MENNDEZ_saidthattheadoptionofthenewlawcouldbeconsideredasaform *&' ofreparation:itwouldpreventanyrecurrenceofthetypeofproblemfacedbythecomplainant. +'(   , () 9.TheCHAIRPERSONsaidthattheissueatstakewasnotwhetherIndiahadratifiedtheConvention,   butthatCanadahadfailedtocomplywiththeCommittee'srequestforinterimmeasuresofprotectionby  returningthecomplainanttoIndia.TheCommitteeshouldnotethatfactwithregretinitslettertotheState  partyandrecommendtheprovisionoffullreparation.  Ѐ10.Ms._BELMIR_agreedthatthequestionofwhetherIndiahadratifiedtheConventionwasirrelevant.   ShewonderedwhattheCommittee'sjurisprudencewasinsuchcases,expressingconcernaboutsetting   aprecedentforsimilarcasesinfuture.   11.Mr._MARIO_Ԁ_MENNDEZ_agreedwithMs._Belmir_Ԁthatwhatwasimportantwashowthe z   CommitteedealtwithCanada,andthatitwouldcomplicatematterstoenterintotheterritoryofbilateral t  relationsbetweenIndiaandCanada.Heproposedthatintermsoffurtheraction,theCommitteeshould n  writetotheStatepartynotingwithregretitsinterpretationoftheinterimmeasuresofprotection,while h  recognizingthattheywerenotbinding.ItshouldalsopointoutthatIndiawasnotapartytotheConvention. b  InsteadofrequestingfullreparationorreparationinkeepingwiththeConvention,theCommitteeshould \  seekassurancesthatthecomplainantwouldnotbesubjectedtotortureinIndia. V 12.TheCHAIRPERSONsaidhetookitthattheCommitteeagreedtothefurtheractionproposedby J Mr._Mario_Ԁ_Menndez_;thetextofthereportwouldbeamendedaccordingly. D 13.Itwassodecided. 8 ... 2 CE.,US.,AUSCE.,Thediscussioncoveredinthesummaryrecordendedat4p.m. ,| _____________________  p *Nosummaryrecordswaspreparedfortherestofthemeeting. d CE.,US.,(