WPC!   ҈Se4^cxږxL3x%t;@RoMNG6KΫ~9FŔGuMh꣍i$$K}&NFoH"ts6)0kPi1KG}T30a NˣiP#\Izmz"~v+ %0!N.W|D DG-!/q[1ǰU .\T%xJu н-! C8ߴm$RΞM[Cq*.3D b{sr3p.h>ɚ)Df%~ˍS/p*lr88#e=#\l0ܢfՀ įc?Zi?L*WP)CK,Z} -:/$D7wݞ߮aY['|亳, K#U N %1 0r7 ^ w 4   m N 0J 0A U$># U a - UB U> DE. 0Us 0 0 0d 0 0 0} 0$ 0 0` 0 0 0 0> 0 0z 0 0 0% 0 0 0S 0 0 0- 0 0K 02 0< f= a? fS aU fi fk am B- a f a f a f a f!a!f!a! B0!fM! D+O!az!z!f!a! 0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX(J$  XXXXXXXXԚ#8 p83|x4U 42ParaNo. 8.9 AIQ!$8S\  `&Times New RomanS8.9 AIQ!$8S\  `&Times New RomanS<SS:Footnote TexS\  `&Times New RomanSS\  `&Times New RomanS\  `&Times New Roman  ##Xd#\  `*Times New RomanTT\  `&Times New Roman88889Hairline!dxdx*+ (_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~ q4heading 3   2( 4 <DL2  UK XXX     US   2( 4 <DL2  <:Default ParaTable_ATable_ATABLE A)Hairline dTable_AhTABLE ATable_ATable_ATable_ATable_A d'dxdTable_ATABLE B !  Xs1XXXXs1XXXs1  _  XXs1CANADA#Xs1X#   uUKUS., Follow-up  a)JurisprudenceActionbyTreatyBodies US.,UK.,   _CCPR_ԀA/51/40,vol.I(1996)    VIII.FOLLOWUPACTIVITIESUNDERTHEOPTIONALPROTOCOL   ...    429.Acountry-by-countrybreakdownoffollow-uprepliesreceivedorrequestedandoutstandingasat   26July1996providesthefollowingpicture:   ...   Canada:Sixviewsfindingviolations;foursatisfactoryfollowuprepliesandtwoincompletefollowup v repliesreceivedfromtheStateParty p   d  _CCPR_ԀA/52/40,vol.I(1997)   VIII.FOLLOW-UPACTIVITIESUNDERTHEOPTIONALPROTOCOL  ...  524.Acountry-by-countrybreakdownoffollow-uprepliesreceivedorrequestedandoutstandingasof   30June1997providesthefollowingpicture(Viewsinwhichthedeadlineforreceiptoffollow-up   informationhadnotyetexpiredhavenotbeenincluded):   ... t  Canada:SixViewsfindingviolations:24/1978-Lovelace(Selecteddecisions,vol.1);12/forStateparty h  follow-upreply,seeSelecteddecisions,vol.2,annexI);13/27/1978-_Pinkney_(Selecteddecisions,vol. b  1);noStatepartyfollow-upreplyreceived;167/1984-_Ominayak_(1990Report);14/Stateparty \  follow-upreply,dated25November1991,unpublished;359/1989and385/1989-Davidsonand V McIntyre(1993Report);15/Statepartyfollow-upreply,dated2December1993,unpublished;469/1991 P -_Ng_(1994Report);9/Statepartyfollow-upreply,dated3October1994,unpublished. J   _______________ %4!"   12/InternationalCovenantonCivilandPoliticalRights.HumanRightsCommittee.Selected &."# decisionsundertheOptionalProtocol(_CCPR_/C/OP/1)(UnitedNationspublication,SalesNo.84.XIV.2), '(#$ vol.1. ("$%   13/Ibid.(_CCPR_/C/OP/2)(UnitedNationspublication,SalesNo.89.XIV.1),vol.2. )%&   14/OfficialRecordsoftheGeneralAssembly,FortyfifthSession,SupplementNo.40(A/45/40). *&'   15/Ibid.,FortyeighthSession,SupplementNo.40(A/48/40). +'(   9/OfficialRecordsoftheGeneralAssembly,FortyninthSession,SupplementNo.40(A/49/40). , ()   -)* _CCPR_ԀA/53/40,vol.I(1998)   VIII.FOLLOW-UPACTIVITIESUNDERTHEOPTIONALPROTOCOL  ...  486.TheCommittee'spreviousreport(A/52/40)containedadetailedcountry-by-countrybreakdownof   follow-uprepliesreceivedorrequestedandoutstandingasof30June1997.Thelistthatfollowsshows   theadditionalcasesinrespectofwhichfollow-upinformationhasbeenrequestedfromStates(Viewsin   whichthedeadlineforreceiptoffollow-upinformationhadnotyetexpiredhavenotbeenincluded).Italso z   indicatesthosecasesinwhichrepliesareoutstanding.Inmanyofthesecasestherehasbeennochange t  sincethepreviousreport.ThisisbecausetheresourcesavailablefortheCommittee'sworkwere n  considerablyreducedinthecurrentyear,preventingitfromundertakingacomprehensivesystematic h  follow-up_programme_. b  ... V Canada:SixViewsfindingviolations:24/1978-Lovelace(Selecteddecisions,vol.1);2/forStateparty J follow-upreply,seeSelecteddecisions,vol.2,annexI);3/27/1978-_Pinkney_(Selecteddecisions,vol.1); D noStatepartyfollow-upreplyreceived;167/1984-_Ominayak_(1990Report(A/45/40));Stateparty > follow-upreply,dated25November1991,unpublished;359/1989and385/1989-Davidsonand 8 McIntyre(1993Report(A/48/40));Statepartyfollow-upreply,dated2December1993,unpublished; 2 469/1991-_Ng_(1994Report(A/49/40));Statepartyfollow-upreply,dated3October1994, ,| unpublished. &v Ѐ  p Ѐ j ________ '(#$   2/InternationalCovenantonCivilandPoliticalRights.HumanRightsCommittee.Selected ("$% decisionsundertheOptionalProtocol(_CCPR_/C/OP/1)(UnitedNationspublication,SalesNo.84.XIV.2), )%& vol.1. *&'   3/Ibid.(_CCPR_/C/OP/2)(UnitedNationspublication,SalesNo.89.XIV.1),vol.2. +'(  -)*  _CCPR_ԀA/54/40,vol.I(1999)   VII.FOLLOW-UPACTIVITIESUNDERTHEOPTIONALPROTOCOL  461.TheCommittee'spreviousreport(A/53/40)containedadetailedcountry-by-countrybreakdownof  follow-uprepliesreceivedorrequestedandoutstandingasof30June1998.Thelistthatfollowsshows   theadditionalcasesinrespectofwhichfollow-upinformationhasbeenrequestedfromStates(Viewsin   whichthedeadlineforreceiptoffollow-upinformationhadnotyetexpiredhavenotbeenincluded).Italso   indicatesthosecasesinwhichrepliesareoutstanding.Inmanyofthesecasestherehasbeennochange   sincethelastreport.ThisisbecausetheresourcesavailablefortheCommittee'sworkhavebeen z   considerablyreducedpreventingitfromundertakingacomprehensivesystematicfollow-up_programme_. t  ... h  Canada:SixViewsfindingviolations:24/1977-Lovelace(SelectedDecisions,vol.1);17/forState \  party'sfollow-upreply,seeSelectedDecisions,vol.2,18/annexI;27/1978-_Pinkney_(inSelected V Decisions,vol.1);nofollow-upreplyreceived;167/1984-_Ominayak_(A/45/40);follow-upreply,dated P 25November1991,unpublished;359/1989and385/1989-_Ballantyne_ԀandDavidson,andMcIntyre J (A/48/40);follow-upreply,dated2December1993,unpublished;469/1991-_Ng_(A/49/40);follow-up D reply,dated3October1994,unpublished. > __________ ("$%   17/InternationalCovenantonCivilandPoliticalRights.HumanRightsCommittee.Selected )%& DecisionsundertheOptionalProtocol(UnitedNationspublication,SalesNo.84.XIV.2),vol.1,hereafter *&' "SelectedDecisions,vol.1". +'(   18/Ibid.,vol.2(UnitedNationspublication,SalesNo.89.XIV.1),hereafter"SelectedDecisions, , () vol.2".  -)*  _CCPR_ԀA/55/40,vol.I(2000)   UKUS., Xs1XXXs1  Xs1XXXs1 !  VI.FOLLOWUPACTIVITIESUNDERTHEOPTIONALPROTOCOL !!݌  ЌXs1XXXs1  #Xs1XXXs1!#Xs1XXXs1...  #Xs1XXXs1"#Xs1XXXs1596.TheCommitteespreviousreport(A/54/40)containedadetailedcountrybycountrybreakdownof   followuprepliesreceivedorrequestedandoutstandingasof30June1999.Thelistthatfollowsshows   theadditionalcasesinrespectofwhichfollowupinformationhasbeenrequestedfromStates.(Viewsin   whichthedeadlineforreceiptoffollowupinformationhadnotyetexpiredhavenotbeenincluded.)Italso z   indicatesthosecasesinwhichrepliesareoutstanding.Inmanyofthesecasestherehasbeennochange t  sincethelastreport.ThisisbecausethelimitedresourcesavailablefortheCommitteesworkpreventit n  fromundertakingacomprehensiveorsystematicfollowupprogramme. h  ... \  Canada:NineViewsfindingviolations:24/1977Lovelace(inSelectedDecisions,vol.1);forState P partysfollowupreply,seeSelectedDecisions,vol.2,annexI;27/1978_Pinkney_(inSelectedDecisions, J vol.1);nofollowupreplyreceived;167/1984_Ominayak_(A/45/40);followupreply,dated D 25November1991,unpublished;359/1989and385/1989_Ballantyne_ԀandDavidsonandMcIntyre > (A/48/40);followupreply,dated2December1993,unpublished;455/1991Singer(A/49/40);no 8 followupreplyrequired;469/1991_Ng_(A/49/40);followupreply,dated3October1994,unpublished; 2 633/1995_Gauthier_(A/54/40);forfollowupreplyseebelow;694/1996_Waldman_(annexIX,sect.H.); ,| forfollowupreplyseebelow. &v ... j #Xs1XXXs1 ##Xs1XXXs1US.,UK.,a!UKUS.,OverviewoffollowuprepliesreceivedandoftheSpecialRapporteursfollowupconsultationsduringthe ^ reportingperiod  X ... !L #Xs1XXXs1Z+#Xs1XXXs1Canada.InresponsetotheCommitteesViewsincaseNo.633/1995_Gauthier_,theGovernmentof #@  CanadainformedtheCommitteeon20October1999thatithadappointedanindependentexpertto $: ! reviewthePressGalleryscriteriaforaccreditation,aswellastheauthorsapplicationforaccreditation. %4!" TheGovernmenthasalsotakenmeasurestoallowvisitorstoParliamenttotakenotes.Inordertoaddress &."# theCommitteesconcernthatthereshouldbeapossibilityofrecourseforindividualswhoaredenied '(#$ membershipofthePressGallery,inthefuturetheSpeakeroftheHousewillbecompetenttoreceive ("$% complaintsandappointanindependentexperttoreporttohimaboutthevalidityofthecomplaints.Bya )%& latersubmission,datedMarch2000,theGovernmentprovidedtheCommitteewithacopyoftheexpert *&' reportonthePressGalleryscriteriaforaccreditationandtheirapplicationintheauthorscase.Following +'( theissuingofthereport,theauthorhasbeeninvitedtoapplyagainforaccreditationwiththePressGallery, , () ifhesowishes. -)*  8s1XXdd8   #Xs1XXXs1,#Xs1XXXs1#Xs1XXXs12#Xs1XXXs1WithregardtocaseNo.694/1996_Waldman_,theGovernmentofCanadainformedtheCommitteeby  noteof3February2000,thatmattersofeducationfallundertheexclusivejurisdictionoftheprovinces.  TheGovernmentofOntariohascommunicatedthatithasnoplanstoextendfundingtoprivatereligious  schoolsortotheparentsofchildrenthatattendsuchschools,andthatitintendstoadherefullytoits  constitutionalobligationtofundRomanCatholicschools.AfterreceiptoftheStatepartysreplythe   CommitteeorganizedameetingwiththeStatepartysrepresentative,whichtookplaceon18July2000.   Areferencetothismeetingwillbeincludedinthefollow-upprogressreport,tobepresentedtothe   CommitteeinMarch2001.#Xs1XXXs12#US.,UK.,+UKUS.,       `     '(#$ _CCPR_ԀA/56/40,vol.I(2001)   Xs1XXXs1ChapterIV.FollowupActivitiesundertheOptionalProtocolUS.,UK.,6UKUS.,#Xs1XXXs17#Xs1XXXs1    ...  180.TheCommitteespreviousannualreport(A/55/40,vol.I,chap.VI)containedadetailedcountryby   countrysurveyonfollowuprepliesreceivedorrequestedandoutstandingasof30June2000.Thelist   thatfollowsupdatesthatsurvey,indicatingthosecasesinwhichrepliesareoutstanding,butdoesnottake   intoaccounttheCommitteesViewsadoptedduringtheseventysecondsession,forwhichfollowup z   repliesarenotyetdue.Inmanycasestherehasbeennochangesincethepreviousreport. t  ... h  Canada:EightViewsconcerningninecasesfindingviolations:24/1977Lovelace(inSelectedDecisions, \  vol.1);forStatepartysfollowupreply,seeSelectedDecisions,vol.2,annexI;27/1978_Pinkney_(in V SelectedDecisions,vol.1);nofollowupreplyreceived;167/1984_Ominayak_(A/45/40);followup P reply,dated25November1991,unpublished;359/1989and385/1989_Ballantyne_ԀandDavidson,and J McIntyre(A/48/40);followupreply,dated2December1993,unpublished;455/1991Singer(A/49/40); D nofollowupreplyrequired;469/1991_Ng_(A/49/40);followupreply,dated3October1994, > unpublished;633/1995_Gauthier_(A/54/40);forfollowupreply,seeA/55/40,paragraph607andbelow; 8 694/1996_Waldman_(A/55/40);forfollowupreply,seeA/55/40;paragraph608andbelow.#Xs1XXXs1Q8#US.,UK.,8UKUS., 2 @*... &v  Xs1XXXs1 Overviewoffollowuprepliesreceivedduringthereportingperiod,SpecialRapporteursfollowup j consultationsandotherdevelopments d ...  X 186.Canada:FollowingtheCommitteesViewsincaseNo.633/1995_Gauthier_,theGovernmentof !L CanadainformedtheCommitteeon20October1999thatithadappointedanindependentexpertto "F reviewthePressGalleryscriteriaforaccreditationaswellastheauthorsapplicationforaccreditation. #@  InordertoaddresstheCommitteesconcernthattherebeapossibilityofrecoursebyindividualswhoare $: ! deniedmembershipofthePressGallery,inthefuturetheSpeakeroftheHousewillbecompetentto %4!" receivecomplaintsandappointanindependentexperttoreporttohimaboutthevalidityofthecomplaint. &."# Bysubmissionof4March2000,theGovernmentprovidedtheCommitteewithacopyoftheexpertreport '(#$ onthePressGalleryscriteriaforaccreditationandtheirapplicationintheauthorscase.TheSpecial ("$% RapporteurmetwitharepresentativeofCanadaon18July2000.TheSecretariathasrequestedtheState )%& partytoprovideacopyoftheSpeakersdecisionintheauthorscase.Bylettersof9October2000and *&' of7March2001,theauthorcomplainsthattheViewshavenotbeenimplementedbytheStatepartyand +'( referstoaletterhereceivedfromtheHouseofCommonsLawClerkadvisinghimthattheSpeakerofthe , () HouseplaysnopartinrespectofapplicationstothePressGalleryandthathewouldhavetoreapplywith -)* thePressGallery.Theauthorallegesthatnoappealprocessisavailable.  187.WithregardtocaseNo.694/1996_Waldman_,theGovernmentofCanadainformedtheCommittee,  bynoteof3February2000,thatmattersofeducationfallundertheexclusivejurisdictionoftheprovinces.  TheGovernmentofOntariohascommunicatedthatithasnoplanstoextendfundingtoprivatereligious  schoolsortotheparentsofchildrenthatattendsuchschools,andthatitintendstoadherefullytoits   constitutionalobligationtofundRomanCatholicschools.On17February2000,theauthorsentacritical   responsetotheStatepartysreply.HemetwiththeSpecialRapporteuronMonday,13March2000.   TheSpecialRapporteurmetwitharepresentativeofCanadaon18July2000.Inafurtherletter,dated   14February2001,theauthoragainexpresseshisdissatisfactionwiththeStatepartysfailuretoimplement z   theViewsandaskstheCommitteetodiscussCanadasnoncomplianceatapublicmeetingorinthe t  contextofafollowupvisit.HeindicatesthattheMinisterofEducationofOntariohasstatedthatthe n  GovernmentofOntario isnotpreparedtoadoptthealternativessuggestedbythe_UNHRC_Ԁforcomplying h  withthedecision.#Xs1XXXs1j@#US.,UK.,@ b    P Xs1XXXs1UKUS.,_CCPR_ԀA/57/40,vol.I(2002)   ChapterVI.Followupactivitiesundertheoptionalprotocol  ...  228.ThepreviousannualreportoftheCommittee(A/56/40,vol.I,chap.VI)containedadetailed   countrybycountrysurveyoffollowuprepliesreceivedorrequestedandoutstandingasof30June2001.   Thelistthatfollowsupdatesthatsurvey,indicatingthosecasesinwhichrepliesareoutstanding,butdoes   notincluderesponsesconcerningtheCommitteesViewsadoptedduringtheseventyfourthandseventy z   fifthsessions,forwhichfollowuprepliesarenotyetdue.Inmanycasestherehasbeennochangesince t  thepreviousreport. n  ... b  Canada:Viewsinninecaseswithfindingsofviolations: V 24/1977Lovelace(inSelectedDecisions,vol.1);forStatepartysfollowupreply,seeSelected J Decisions,vol.2,annexI; D 27/1978_Pinkney_(inSelectedDecisions,vol.1);nofollow-upreplyreceived; 8 167/1984_Ominayak_(A/45/40);followupreply,dated25November1991,unpublished; ,| 359/1989_Ballantyne_andDavidson󀄀385/1989,andMcIntyre(A/48/40);followupreply,dated2  p December1993,unpublished; j 455/1991Singer(A/49/40);nofollowupreplyrequired;469/1991_Ng_(A/49/40);followupreply, ^ dated3October1994,unpublished;  X 633/1995_Gauthier_(A/54/40);forfollowupreply,seeA/55/40,paragraph607;A/56/40,paragraph !L 186;andparagraph[236]below; "F 694/1996_Waldman_(A/55/40);forfollowupreply,seeA/55/40,paragraph608,andA/56/40, $: ! paragraph187,andparagraph[237]below. %4!" ... '(#$ 229.ForfurtherinformationonthestatusofalltheViewsinwhichfollowupinformationremains )%& outstandingorinrespectofwhichfollowupconsultationshavebeenorwillbescheduled,referenceis *&' madetothefollowupprogressreportpreparedfortheseventy-fourthsessionoftheCommittee +'( (_CCPR_/C/74/R.7/Rev.1,dated28March2002),discussedinpublicsessionattheCommittees2009th , () meetingon4April2002(_CCPR_/C/SR.2009).ReferenceisalsomadetotheCommitteesprevious -)* reports,inparticularA/56/40,paragraphs182to200.  Overviewoffollowuprepliesreceivedduringthereportingperiod,SpecialRapporteursfollowup  consultationsandotherdevelopments  230.TheCommitteewelcomesthefollowuprepliesthathavebeenreceivedduringthereportingperiod   andexpressesitsappreciationforallthemeasurestakenorenvisagedtoprovidevictimsofviolationsof   theCovenantwithaneffectiveremedy.ItencouragesallStatespartieswhichhaveaddressedpreliminary   followuprepliestotheSpecialRapporteurtoconcludetheirinvestigationsinasexpeditiousamanneras   possibleandtoinformtheSpecialRapporteuroftheirresults.Thefollowuprepliesreceivedduringthe z   periodunderreviewandotherdevelopmentsaresummarizedbelow. t  ... h  236.Canada:WithregardtocaseNo.633/1995_Gauthier_(A/54/40),theauthor,byletterof24 \  November2001,informedtheCommitteethathehadbeengrantedatemporarysix-monthpassbythe V CanadianParliamentaryPressGalleryCorporation,whichhehadacceptedunderprotestforeconomic P reasons.Hehadbeendeniedapermanentpass,withmembershipofthePressGalleryCorporationstill J required.TheauthorstatedthattheIndependentExpertappointedbytheSpeakertoreviewtheauthors D casewassummaryandsuperficial,andcametotheoppositeconclusionsoftheCommittee.TheSpeaker > nowregardedthematterclosed.Byletterof23February2002,theauthorinformedtheCommitteethat 8 theStatepartyhadstillfailedtocomplywiththeCommitteesViews.Theauthorhasbeenadvisedthat 2 alldealingsmustbewiththeprivatePressGalleryorganization,andhadstillonlybeenprovideda ,| temporarypasswithlimitedbenefits.HesoughttheCommitteesdeterminationoftheamountofdamages &v thattheStatepartyshouldpayhim.  p 237.WithregardtocaseNo.694/1996_Waldman_(A/55/40),theauthorinformedtheCommitteeby d letterof20March2002thattheStatepartyhadfailedtotakeanymeasurestocorrectthediscrimination ^ identifiedbytheCommitteeandaskedtheSpecialRapporteurtofollowupagainwiththeStatepartys  X authorities. !R ... "F #Xs1XXXs1|N#US.,UK.,N  #@  _CCPR_ԀA/58/40,vol.I(2003)   CHAPTERVI.FollowupactivitiesundertheOptionalProtocol  ...  223.ThepreviousannualreportoftheCommittee1containedadetailedcountrybycountrysurveyof   followuprepliesreceivedorrequestedandoutstandingasof30June2002.Thelistthatfollowsupdates   thatsurvey,indicatingthosecasesinwhichrepliesareoutstanding,butdoesnotincluderesponses   concerningtheCommitteesViewsadoptedduringtheseventyseventhandseventyeighthsessions,for   whichfollowuprepliesarenotyetdueinthemajorityofcases.Inmanycasestherehasbeennochange z   sincethepreviousreport.* t  ... h  Canada:0 `  Viewsinninecaseswithfindingsofviolations:\ ` (#` (# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#24/1977Lovelace(inSelectedDecisions,vol.1);forStatepartysfollow-up P reply,seeSelectedDecisions,volume2,annexI;J (# (# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#27/1978_Pinkney_(inSelectedDecisions,vol.1);nofollow-upreplyreceived;> (# (# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#167/1984_Ominayak_(A/45/40);followupreply,dated25November1991, 2 unpublished;,| (# (# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#359/1989_Ballantyne_ԀandDavidsonand385/1989McIntyre(A/48/40);  p follow-upreply,dated2December1993,unpublished;j (# (# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#455/1991Singer(A/49/40);nofollowupreplyrequired;^ (# (# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#469/1991_Ng_(A/49/40);followupreply,dated3October1994,unpublished;!R (# (# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#633/1995_Gauthier_(A/54/40);forfollowupreply,seeA/55/40,paragraph "F 607,A/56/40,paragraph186andA/57/40,paragraph236;#@  (# (# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#694/1996_Waldman_(A/55/40);forfollowupreply,seeA/55/40,paragraph %4!" 608,A/56/40,paragraph187andA/57/40,paragraph237.&."# (# (# Notes '(#$ 1.[OfficialRecordsoftheGeneralAssembly],FiftyseventhSession,SupplementNo.40(A/57/40), )%& vol.I,chap.VI. *&' *ThedocumentsymbolA/[SessionNo.]/40referstotheOfficialRecordoftheGeneralAssembly +'( inwhichthecaseappears;annexVIreferstothepresentreport,vol.II. , ()  -)* Ї _CCPR_Ԁ_CCPR_/C/80/FU/1(2004)    Follow-UpProgressReportsubmittedbyTheSpecialRapporteurforFollow-UponViews   Follow-upprogressreport   1.ThecurrentreportupdatesthepreviousFollow-upProgressReport,(_CCPR_/C/71/R.13)[Ed.Note:   _CCPR_/C/71/R.13isnotpubliclyavailable]whichfocusedoncasesinwhich,bytheendofFebruary   2001,nooronlyincompletefollow-upinformationhadbeenreceivedfromStatesparties,orwhere z   follow-upinformationchallengedthefindingsandrecommendationsoftheCommittee.Inanefforttoreduce t  thesizeofthefollow-upreport,thiscurrentreportonlyreflectscasesinwhichinformationwasreceived n  fromeithertheauthorortheStatepartyfrom1March2001to2April2004.Itistheintentionofthe h  SpecialRapporteurtoupdatethisreportonanannualbasis. b  ... V CANADA: J _Gauthier_Ԁv.Canada,Caseno.633/1995,Viewsadoptedon7April1999 > Violationsfound:Article19,paragraph2 2 Issuesofcase:AccesstopressfacilitiesofParliament &v Remedyrecommended:Anindependentreviewoftheauthor'sapplicationtohaveaccesstothepress j facilitiesofParliament. d DeadlineforStatepartyfollow-upinformation:6July1999  X Follow-upinformationreceivedfromStateparty:SeepreviousFollow-upReport(_CCPR_/C/71/R.13) !L Follow-upinformationreceivedfromauthor:SeepreviousFollow-upReport(_CCPR_/C/71/R.13)orthe #@  Committee'sAnnualReport(A/57/40,Vol.1,para.236).Byletterof24November2001,theauthor $: ! informedtheCommitteethathehadbeengrantedatemporarysix-monthpassbytheCanadian %4!" ParliamentaryPressGalleryCorporation,whichhehadacceptedunderprotestforeconomicreasons.He &."# hadbeendeniedapermanentpass,withmembershipofthePressGalleryCorporationstillrequired.The '(#$ authorstatedthattheIndependentExpertappointedbytheSpeakertoreviewtheauthor'scasewas ("$% summaryandsuperficial,andcametooppositeconclusionsthanthoseoftheCommittee.TheSpeaker )%& nowregardedthematterclosed.Byletterof23February2002,theauthorinformedtheCommitteethat *&' theStatepartyhadstillfailedtocomplywiththeCommittee'sViews.Theauthorhasbeenadvisedthat +'( alldealingsmustbewiththeprivatePressGalleryorganization,andhadstillonlybeenprovideda , () temporarypasswithlimitedbenefits.HesoughttheCommittee'sdeterminationoftheamountofdamages -)* thattheStatepartyshouldpayhim.Byletterof15April2002,heagaininformedtheCommitteethatits  ViewshavenotbeenimplementedbytheStateparty.  SpecialRapporteur'srecommendations:AcopyoftheIndependentExpert's/Speaker'sreportshouldbe  requestedfromtheStateparty.  _Waldman_Ԁv.Canada,Caseno.694/1996,Viewsadoptedon3November1999   Violationfound:Article26 z   Issuesofcase:Discriminationonthebasisofreligioninthedistributionofsubsidiestoschools n  Remedyrecommended:Aneffectiveremedyeliminatingthisdiscrimination. b  DeadlineforStatepartyfollow-upinformation:3February2000 V Follow-upinformationreceivedfromStateparty:Seepreviousfollow-upreportof20March2001 J (_CCPR_/C/71/R.13)ortheCommittee'sAnnualReport(A/56/40,Vol.1,para.187). D Follow-upinformationreceivedfromauthor:Seepreviousthefollow-upreportof20March2001 8 (_CCPR_/C/71/R.13)ortheCommittee'sAnnualReport(A/57/40,Vol.1,para.237).Bylettersof20 2 March2002and2January2004,theauthorreiteratedthattheViewshadstillnotbeenimplementedand ,| requestedtomeetagainwiththeRapporteur.HealsorequestedtheSpecialRapporteurtomeetagainwith &v arepresentativeoftheStateparty.  p SpecialRapporteur'srecommendation:AmeetingshouldbearrangedwithaStatepartyrepresentative. d Judgev.Canada,Caseno.829/1998,Viewsadoptedon5August2003 !R Violationsfound:Articles6,paragraph1,and2,paragraph3. "F Issuesofcase:Deportationtofacethedeathpenalty $: ! Remedyrecommended:Tomakesuchrepresentationsasarepossibletothereceivingstatetopreventthe &."# carryingoutofthedeathpenaltyontheauthor. '(#$ DeadlineforStatepartyfollow-upinformation:13November2003 )%& Follow-upinformationreceivedfromStateparty:Bynote_verbale_Ԁof17November2003,theStateparty +'( informedtheCommitteethaton7October2003pursuanttoarequestreceivedbyAmnestyInternational, , () thefederalgovernmentofficials,representativesofAmnestyandtheauthor'scounselmettohearAmnesty's -)* viewsonhowCanadashouldgiveeffecttotheViews.On24October2003,theCanadianConsulGeneral  inBuffalocontactedtheGovernorofPennsylvaniaandraisedtheJudgecasewithhim.On7November  2003,theGovernmentofCanadadeliveredinpersonadiplomaticnotetotheGovernmentoftheUnited  States,whichincludedacopyoftheViewsandrequestedtheUnitedStatesnottocarryoutthedeath  penaltyagainstMr.Judge.Italsorequestedthatthisrequestnottocarryoutthedeathpenaltybe  transmittedtorelevantstateauthoritiesexpeditiously.TheStatepartyinformedtheCommitteethatsince   theSupremeCourtofCanada'sdecisioninU.S.v.Burnsand_Rafaey_Ԁin2001,ithasbeeninsubstantial   compliancewiththeCommittee'sinterpretationofarticle6,paragraph1asstatedinitsViews.TheViews   havebeenpostedontheDepartmentofCanadianHeritagewebsite.   TheStatepartynotesthattheCommittee'sinterpretationofarticle6,paragraph1,goesbeyondthe t  languageinresolution2003/67ofthe59thsessionoftheCommissiononHumanRights.Itexpresses n  concernovertheCommittee'sstatementthattherightsintheCovenantshouldbeinterpretedbyreference h  tothetimeoftheCommittee'sexamination,andnotbyreferencetothetimetheallegedviolationtook b  place.ItassertsthatcompliancewiththeCovenantshouldnotbeassessedagainstaninterpretationof \  Covenantrightsthathadnocurrencyatthetimeoftheallegedviolationandthuscouldnothavebeen V reasonablyanticipatedatthetimeoftheiractions. P Follow-upinformationreceivedfromauthor:Byletterof1December2003,author'scounselexpressed D doubtsabouttheeffectivenessoftheStateparty'sattemptstohavetheauthorremovedfromdeathrow. > HehasreceivednoinformationeitheronthenatureoftheinterventionmadebytheStatepartynorits 8 outcome. 2 SpecialRapporteur'srecommendation:Statepartyshouldberequestedtoprovideanyfurtherupdate &v receivedfromtheUSauthoritiesontheauthor'ssituation.  p ... d   ^ Xs1XXXs1 _CCPR_,_CCPR_/C/SR.2194(2004)   HumanRightsCommittee  Eightiethsession  Summaryrecordofthesecondpart(public)ofthe2194thmeeting   HeldatHeadquarters,NewYork,   onFriday,2April2004,at10a.m.   ... t  FollowuponViewsundertheOptionalProtocol h  ... \  3. Mr._Scheinin_ saidthat,withregardtoreconsideration,iftheStatepartycomplainedthattheCommittee P wasmistakenastothefacts,theanswershouldbethattheCommitteesdecisionwasmadeonlyonthe J basisofthefactsprovidedbytheparties.TheSpecialRapporteurforfollowuponViewsunderthe D OptionalProtocolcoulddiscusswiththeStatepartyandwiththeCommitteethepossibleeffectofthe > correctedfactswithrespecttotheremedy,buttheViewswouldstandnonetheless.If,ontheotherhand, 8 theStatepartywascontestingtheinterpretationofthelaw,theSpecialRapporteurshouldstandfirm,since 2 theinterpretationhadbeenarrivedatthroughanadversarialproceedingbetweentheparties.However,he ,| mightsuggesttotheStatepartythatitcouldraisesuchissuesoflawinageneralwayinitsnextperiodic &v report.  p 4.InthefaceofafailureorrefusaltoimplementtheViews,itmustbeadmittedthattheCommitteeitself d hadlittlepowertoinducecomplianceandwouldneedtocallforpoliticalsupportfromtheUnitedNations ^ andtheotherStatespartiestotheProtocol.TheOrganizationasawholeshoulddiscusswhatmechanisms  X couldbedeveloped. !R ... "F 6.Mr._Solari_Ԁ_Yrigoyen_Ԁsaidthattheprincipleshouldbemadeclearthattherewasnoprocedurefor $: ! reconsiderationoftheCommitteesViewsexceptincaseofobviouserror.IncaseNo.701/1996(_G;mez_ %4!" _Vsquez_Ԁv.Spain),theCommitteesfirmnesshadultimatelyledtheStatepartytochangeitslegislation. &."# WithregardtocaseNo.848/1999(_Rodrguez_Ԁ_Orejuela_Ԁv.Colombia)andcaseNo.859/1999(_Jimnez_ '(#$ _Vaca_Ԁv.Colombia),hefounditoddthattheStatepartywasawaitingtheCommitteesresponsebefore ("$% implementingtheViews.HerecalledthatintheconsiderationoftheStatepartysreportconcernshadbeen )%& expressedabouttheCommitteeofMinistersthathadthepowertorecommendwhetherornotto *&' implementtheCommitteesViews.IncaseNo.633/1995(_Gauthier_Ԁv.Canada)itappearedthatthe +'( StatepartyhadnotcompliedwiththeCommitteesViews.Heagreedthatsuchcasesshouldbementioned , () intheCommitteesreport. -)* ...  12. Mr.Shearer saidthatheagreedwithMr._Scheinin_sproposals.WithreferencetocaseNo.  694/1996(_Waldman_Ԁv.Canada),afurthermeetingwiththeStatepartywouldbepointlessand  counterproductive,sincethecaseinvolvedaconstitutionalissuebeyondthepowerofthefederal  GovernmentofCanadatoresolve.  ...   #Xs1XXXs1#     Xs1XXXs1CEUS.,_CCPR_ԀA/59/40vol.I(2004)   CHAPTERVI.FOLLOWUPACTIVITIESUNDERTHEOPTIONALPROTOCOL  ...  230.ThepreviousannualreportoftheCommittee1containedadetailedcountry-by-countrysurveyof   followuprepliesreceivedorrequestedandoutstandingasof30June2003.Thelistthatfollowsupdates   thatsurvey,indicatingthosecasesinwhichrepliesareoutstanding,butdoesnotincluderesponses   concerningtheCommitteesViewsadoptedduringtheeightiethandeightyfirstsessions,forwhichfollow z   uprepliesarenotyetdueinthemajorityofcases.Inmanycasestherehasbeennochangesincethe t  previousreport.* n  ... b  US.,CE.,¤*34 ddd Xdd Xdd X(#(#,UU,UU+  1'VV 1UKUS.,Canada:US.,UK.,d 'V 'Viewsin11caseswithfindingsofviolations: 6,V  6 'h '24/1977Lovelace(inSelectedDecisions,vol.1);forStatepartys h follow-upreply,seeSelectedDecisions,volume2,annexI; 6,b  6 '$ '27/1978_Pinkney_(inSelectedDecisions,vol.1);nofollow-upreply $ received; 6,  6 ' '167/1984_Ominayak_(A/45/40);followupreply,dated25November1991,  unpublished; 6,  6 'L '359/1989_Ballantyne_ԀandDavidsonand385/1989McIntyre(A/48/40); L follow-upreply,dated2December1993,unpublished; 6,F  6 ' X '455/1991Singer(A/49/40);nofollowupreplyrequired; 6, X  6 '!  '469/1991_Ng_(A/49/40);followupreply,dated3October1994, !! unpublished; 6,""  6 '$# '633/1995_Gauthier_(A/54/40);forfollowupreply,seeA/55/40,paragraph $$ 607,A/56/40,paragraph186andA/57/40,paragraph236.Inthefollowup % % report(_CCPR_/C/80/FU1),adoptedbytheCommitteeduringitseightieth z&!& session,theSpecialRapporteurrecommendedthatacopyoftheindependent t'"' expertsreportshouldberequestedoftheStateparty.Thisreportwas n(#( providedtotheSpecialRapporteurafterconsultationswiththeStateparty h)$) duringtheeightyfirstsession.Subsequently,theSpecialRapporteur b*%* recommendedtotheCommitteethatthiscaseshouldnolongerbeconsidered \+&+ underthefollowupprocedure; 6,V,',  6 ' '694/1996_Waldman_(A/55/40);forfollowupreply,seeA/55/40,paragraph  608,A/56/40,paragraph187andA/57/40,paragraph237andparagraph    234 below.Inthefollowupreport(_CCPR_/C/80/FU1),adoptedbythe  Committeeduringitseightiethsession,theSpecialRapporteurrecommended  thatameetingshouldbearrangedwithaStatepartyrepresentative.Duringthe  eightyfirstsessionfollowupconsultationswereheldduringwhichtheState   partysrepresentativereiteratedtheStatepartyspositionexpressedin   previous    correspondence; 6,    6 'B  '829/1998Judge(A/58/40);forfollowup,seeparagraph235below.Inthe B  followupreport(_CCPR_/C/80/FU1),adoptedbytheCommitteeduringits <  eightiethsession,theSpecialRapporteurrecommendedthatafurtherupdate 6  ontheauthorssituationintheUnitedStatesshouldberequestedoftheState 0  party.FollowingconsultationsbetweentheStatepartyandtheSpecial *z  Rapporteurduringtheeightyfirstsession,theStatepartysrepresentative $t indicatedhisintentiontoprovidetheSpecialRapporteurwithfurther n information,totheextentpossible,oftheauthorscurrentsituationintheUnited h States; 6,b  6 '$ '1051/2002_Ahani_Ԁ(annexIX);followupreplynotyetdue.$$  $CEUS.,...  OVERVIEWOFFOLLOWUPREPLIESRECEIVEDDURINGTHEREPORTINGPERIOD,  SPECIALRAPPORTEURSFOLLOWUPCONSULTATIONSANDOTHERDEVELOPMENTS ~ 231.TheCommitteewelcomesthefollowuprepliesthathavebeenreceivedduringthereportingperiod r andexpressesitsappreciationforallthemeasurestakenorenvisagedtoprovidevictimsofviolationsof l  theCovenantwithaneffectiveremedy.ItencouragesallStatespartieswhichhaveaddressedpreliminary f! followuprepliestotheSpecialRapporteurtoconcludetheirinvestigationsinasexpeditiousamanneras `" possibleandtoinformtheSpecialRapporteuroftheirresults.Thefollowuprepliesreceivedduringthe Z#  periodunderreviewandotherdevelopmentsaresummarizedbelow. T$! ... H&!# US.,CE.,UKUS.,237.  Canada:withregardtocaseNo.694/1996_Waldman_Ԁ(A/56/40andA/57/40):on2January <(#% 2004,theauthorreiteratedthattheViewshadstillnotbeenimplemented. 6)$& 238.  CaseNo.829/1998Judge(A/58/40):on17November2003,theStatepartyinformedthe *+z&( Committeethaton7October2003,pursuanttoarequestreceivedbyAmnestyInternational,federal $,t') governmentofficials,representativesofAmnestyandtheauthorscounselmettohearAmnestysviews -n(* onhowCanadashouldgiveeffecttotheViews.On24October2003,theCanadianConsulGeneralin  Buffalo,NewYork,contactedtheGovernorofPennsylvaniaandraisedtheJudgecasewithhim.On7  November2003,theGovernmentofCanadadeliveredadiplomaticnotetotheGovernmentoftheUnited  States,whichincludedacopyoftheViewsandrequestedtheUnitedStatesnottocarryoutthedeath  penaltyagainstMr.Judge.Italsorequestedthattherequestnottocarryoutthedeathpenaltybe  transmittedtorelevantstateauthoritiesexpeditiously.TheStatepartyinformedtheCommitteethatsince   theSupremeCourtofCanadasdecisioninUnitedStatesv.Burnsand_Rafaey_in2001,ithadbeenin   substantialcompliancewiththeCommitteesinterpretationofarticle6,paragraph1,asstatedinitsViews.   ItstatedthattheViewshadbeenpostedontheDepartmentofCanadianHeritagewebsite.   239.  TheStatepartyisoftheviewthattheCommitteesinterpretationofarticle6,paragraph1,goes t  beyondthelanguageinCommissiononHumanRightsresolution2003/67.Itexpressedconcernoverthe n  CommitteesstatementthattherightsintheCovenantshouldbeinterpretedbyreferencetothetimeofthe h  Committeesexamination,andnotbyreferencetothetimetheallegedviolationtookplace.Itassertedthat b  compliancewiththeCovenantshouldnotbeassessedagainstaninterpretationofCovenantrightsthathad \  nocurrencyatthetimeoftheallegedviolationandthuscouldnothavebeenreasonablyanticipatedatthe V timeofitsactions.Byletterof1December2003,authorscounselexpresseddoubtsaboutthe P effectivenessoftheStatepartysattemptstohavetheauthorremovedfromdeathrow.Hehasreceived J noinformationeitheronthenatureoftheinterventionmadebytheStatepartynoritsoutcome. D US.,UK.,CEUS.,_______________ 2 Notes ,| 1/Ibid.,FiftyeighthSession,SupplementNo.40(A/58/40),vol.I,chap.VI.  p *ThedocumentsymbolA/[sessionNo.]/40referstotheOfficialRecordsoftheGeneralAssemblyin d whichthecaseappears;annexIXreferstothepresentreport,volumeII. ^ #Xs1XXXs1#US.,CE.,  !L  Xs1XXXs1CEUS., _CCPR_,A/60/40vol.I(2005)   ...  CHAPTERVI.FOLLOWUPACTIVITIESUNDERTHEOPTIONALPROTOCOL   224.InJuly1990,theCommitteeestablishedaprocedureforthemonitoringoffollowuptoitsViews   underarticle5,paragraph4,oftheOptionalProtocol,andcreatedthemandateoftheSpecialRapporteur   forthefollowuponViewstothiseffect.Mr.AndohasbeentheSpecialRapporteursinceMarch2001 z   (seventyfirstsession). t  225.In1991,theSpecialRapporteurbegantorequestfollowupinformationfromStatesparties.Such h  informationhasbeensystematicallyrequestedinrespectofallViewswithafindingofaviolationof b  Covenantrights.Atotalof391Viewsoutofthe503Viewsadoptedsince1979concludedthattherehad \  beenaviolationoftheCovenant. V 228.Inmanycases,theSecretariathasalsoreceivedinformationfromcomplainantstotheeffectthatthe J CommitteesViewshavenotbeenimplemented.Conversely,inrareinstances,thepetitionerhasinformed D theCommitteethattheStatepartyhasinfactgiveneffecttotheCommitteesrecommendations,even > thoughtheStatepartydidnotitselfprovidethatinformation. 8 229.Thepresentannualreportadoptsadifferentformatforthepresentationoffollowupinformation ,| comparedtopreviousannualreports.Thetablebelowdisplaysacompletepictureoffollowupreplies &v fromStatespartiesreceivedasof28July2005,inrelationtoViewsinwhichtheCommitteefound  p violationsoftheCovenant.Whereverpossible,itindicateswhetherfollowuprepliesareorhavebeen j consideredassatisfactoryorunsatisfactory,intermsofcomplyingwiththeCommitteesViews,orwhether d thedialoguebetweentheStatepartyandtheSpecialRapporteurforfollowuponViewscontinues.The ^ notesfollowinganumberofcaseentriesconveyanideaofthedifficultiesincategorizingfollowupreplies.  X 230.FollowupinformationprovidedbyStatespartiesandbypetitionersortheirrepresentativessince !L thelastannualreportissetoutinanewannexVII,containedinVolumeIIofthepresentannualreport. "F This,moredetailed,followupinformationalsoindicatesactionstilloutstandinginthosecasesthatremain #@  underreview. $: !   '(#$ TRO'3#Avery 12-294/295 Laser Ta LandscapeX3' Letter'3Letter LandscapeLaser Ta Landscape3'LetterT   FOLLOWUPRECEIVEDTODATEFORALLCASESOFVIOLATIONSOFTHECOVENANT   *6D7ed  dUUUU34..,'bZ,4bZ, bZ,'bZ,bZ,bZ,bb+  6DD' @6 XXs1#  ۂ#  US.,CE.,UKUS.,Statepartyand  numberofcases o withviolation#  H#  US.,UK.,CEUS., ;DD,!8 @DD @;#   #  US.,CE.,EUKUS.,Communicationnumber,  authorand_locationa_#  ۵#  US.,UK.,CEUS., ;DD,!o@DD @;  #  ۇ#  US.,CE.,UKUS.,Followupresponsereceivedfrom   Statepartyandlocation#  <#  US.,UK.,uCEUS., ;DD,!o @DD @;Satisfactory   response ;DD,!o @DD @;Unsatisfactory   response ;DD,!o@DD @;Nofollowup  response ?DDD,!o@DD @?Followup  dialogue o ongoing IDD:'8 @  DDD @I... ;DD,! a@DD @; ;DD,! a@DD @; ;DD,! a@DD @; ;DD,! a@DD @; ;DD,! a@DD @; ?DDD,! a@DD @? NDD?' a@  DDD @NCanada(11) ;DD,! :@DD @;24/1977,Lovelace  : SelectedDecisions,vol.1 ;DD,! @DD @;X  : SelectedDecisions,vol.2,annex1 ;DD,! @DD @;X ;DD,! : @DD @; ;DD,! :!@DD @; ?DDD,! :"@DD @? NDD?' :#@  DDD @N ;DD,! $@DD @;27/1978,_Pinkney_  % SelectedDecisions,vol.1 ;DD,!U &@DD @; ;DD,! '@DD @; ;DD,! (@DD @;Ѐ ;DD,! )@DD @;X ?DDD,! *@DD @?X NDD?' +@  DDD @N ;DD,!.~ ,@DD @;167/1984,_Ominayak_Ԁetal. .~ - A/45/40 ;DD,!G .@DD @;X .~ / A/59/40* ;DD,!G 0@DD @; ;DD,!.~ 1@DD @; ;DD,!.~ 2@DD @; ?DDD,!.~ 3@DD @?X NDD?'.~ 4@  DDD @N CDDD0! 5@DD @C*Note:Accordingtothisreport,informationwasprovidedon25November1995,butwasunpublished.ItappearsfromtheFollowupfile  6 thatinthisresponse,theStatepartystatesthattheremedywastoconsistofacomprehensivepackageofbenefitsandprogrammesvaluedat  7 $45millionanda95squaremilereserve.NegotiationswerestillongoingastowhethertheBandshouldreceiveadditionalcompensation. QDDB*b 8@  DDD @Q ;DD,!; 9@DD @;359/1989,_Ballantyne_Ԁand ; : DavidsonA/48/40 ;DD,!T;@DD @;X ; < A/59/40* ;DD,!T=@DD @;X ;DD,!; >@DD @; ;DD,!; ?@DD @; ?DDD,!; @@DD @? NDD?'; A@  DDD @N CDDD0!-B@DD @C*Note:Accordingtothisreport,informationwasprovidedon2December1993,butwasunpublished.ItappearsfromtheFollowupfile -C thatinthisresponse,theStatepartystatedthatsections58and68oftheCharteroftheFrenchLanguage,thelegislationwhichwascentralto D thecommunication,willbemodifiedbyBill86(_S.Q._Ԁ1993,c.40).ThedatefortheentryintoforceofthenewlawwastobearoundJanuary oE 1994. QDDB*8F@  DDD @Q ;DD,!aG@DD @;385/1989,McIntyre aH A/48/40 ;DD,!*I@DD @;X* ;DD,!aJ@DD @;X ;DD,!aK@DD @; ;DD,!aL@DD @; ?DDD,!aM@DD @? NDD?'aN@  DDD @N CDDD0!O@DD @C*Note:SeefootnoteoncaseNo.359/1989above. QDDB*P@  DDD @Q ;DD,!Q@DD @;455/1991,Singer R A/49/40 ;DD,!US@DD @;Findingofaviolationwas T consideredsufficient ;DD,!UU@DD @;X ;DD,!V@DD @; ;DD,!W@DD @; ?DDD,!X@DD @? NDD?'Y@  DDD @N ;DD,!.~Z@DD @;469/1991,_Ng_ .~[ A/49/40 ;DD,!G\@DD @;X .~] A/59/40* ;DD,!G^@DD @;X ;DD,!.~_@DD @; ;DD,!.~`@DD @; ?DDD,!.~a@DD @? NDD?'.~b@  DDD @N CDDD0! c@DD @C*Note:Accordingtothisreport,informationwasprovidedon3October1994,butwasunpublished.TheStatepartytransmittedtheViews  d oftheCommitteetotheGovernmentoftheUnitedStatesofAmericaandaskeditforinformationconcerningthemethodofexecution e currentlyinuseintheStateofCalifornia,wheretheauthorfacedcriminalcharges.TheGovernmentoftheUnitedStatesofAmerica bf informedCanadathatthelawintheStateofCaliforniacurrentlyprovidedthatanindividualsentencedtocapitalpunishmentmaychoose +{g betweengasasphyxiationandlethalinjection.Intheeventofafuturerequestforanextraditionwherethedeathpenaltyispossible,the Dh ViewsoftheCommitteeinthiscommunicationwillbetakenintoaccount. QDDB* i@  DDD @Q ;DD,!@DD @;633/1995,_Gauthier_   A/54/40 ;DD,!@DD @;X  A/55/40,A/56/40,A/57/40 ;DD,!@DD @;X  A/59/40 ;DD,!@DD @; ;DD,!@DD @; ?DDD,! @DD @? NDD?' @  DDD @NKF(XZK ;DD,!Z @DD @;694/1996,_Waldman_ Z  A/55/40 ;DD,!#s @DD @;X Z A/55/40,A/56/40,A/57/40, #s A/59/40 ;DD,!<@DD @; ;DD,!Z@DD @;X ;DD,!Z@DD @; ?DDD,!Z@DD @?X NDD?'Z@  DDD @N ;DD,!@DD @;829/1998,Judge  A/58/40 ;DD,! @DD @;X  A/59/40,A/60/40 ;DD,! @DD @;X  A/60/40 ;DD,! @DD @; ;DD,!@DD @; ?DDD,!@DD @?X*  A/60/40 NDD?' @  DDD @N CDDD0!g  @DD @C*Note:TheCommitteedecidedthatitshouldmonitortheoutcomeoftheauthorssituationandtakeanyappropriateaction. QDDB*g !@  DDD @Q ;DD,!@ "@DD @;1051/2002,_Ahani_ @ # A/59/40 ;DD,! Y$@DD @;X @ % A/60/40 ;DD,! Y&@DD @; ;DD,!@ '@DD @;X ;DD,!@ (@DD @; ?DDD,!@ )@DD @?X* @ * A/60/40 PDDD?' Y+@  DDD @P CDDDD0! 2,@DDD @C*Note:TheStatepartywentsomewaytowardsimplementingtheViews:theCommitteehasnotspecificallysaidthatimplementationwas  2- satisfactory.:0. .@   DDDD :#Xs1X #aThelocationreferstothedocumentsymboloftheOfficialRecordsoftheGeneralAssembly,SupplementNo.40,whichistheannualreport v / oftheCommitteetotherespectivesessionsoftheAssembly.  p 0 #Xs1XXXs1#US.,CE.,0  ^3 TRX3'Avery 12-294/295 Laser TaO'3#Avery 12-294/295 Laser Ta Landscape3'Letter2-294/295 Laser Ta   ofth'3Letter LandscapeLaser Ta LandscapeTXs1XXXs1CEUS.,_CCPR_,A/60/40vol.II(2005)   ...  AnnexVII   FOLLOW-UPOFTHEHUMANRIGHTSCOMMITTEEONINDIVIDUALCOMMUNICATIONS   UNDERTHEOPTIONALPROTOCOLTOTHEINTERNATIONALCOVENANTONCIVIL   ANDPOLITICALRIGHTS z   ThisreportsetsoutallinformationprovidedbyStatespartiesandauthorsortheircounselsincethelast n  AnnualReport(A/59/40). h   #Xs1XXXs1M #US.,CE.,l  ...  \      XXs1*12ded'bZ'4bZ4 bZ 'bZ'bZbZbb6D7(#(#,UU,pUU+  1'PP 1#Xs1X  # Stateparty  P  CANADA 6,P  6 Case  b Judge,829/1998 6,b  6 Viewsadoptedon  $ 5August2003 6,$  6 Issuesandviolations  found     Deportationtofacethedeathpenalty-articles6,paragraph1,and2,  paragraph3. ?5  ? Remedy R recommended  L   TomakesuchrepresentationsasarepossibletothereceivingStateto R preventthecarryingoutofthedeathpenaltyontheauthor. ?5L  ? DuedateforState ^ partyresponse   X  13November2003 6,^!  6 Dateofreply  !" 8August2004-hadpreviouslyrepliedon17November2003. 6,!#  6 Statepartyresponse  #$   FollowingtheSpecialRapporteursrequesttotheStatepartytoprovidean #% updatefromtheUnitedStatesauthoritiesontheauthorssituation,theState $& partyreiterateditsresponseoutlinedintheFollow-upReport % ' (_CCPR_/C/80/FU1)andtheAnnualReport(_CCPR_/C/81/_CRP_.1/Add.6). z&!( ItaddedthatastayofexecutionwasissuedbytheUnitedStatesDistrict t'") CourtforEasternPennsylvaniainOctober2002,andnodatehasbeenset n(#* forhisexecution. h)$+  ?5b*%,  ? Stateparty  $,t'-  CANADA 6,$,t'.  6 Case    _Mansour_Ԁ_Ahani_,1051/2002 6,  6 Issuesandviolations r found  l   Removaltoacountrywheretheauthorriskstortureand/or r execution-articles7,9,paragraph4,13. ?5l  ? Remedy . ~ recommended  ( x   Inaccordancewitharticle2,paragraph3(a),oftheCovenant,theState . ~  partyisunderanobligationtoprovidetheauthorwithaneffectiveremedy, ( x  includingcompensation.Inthelightofthecircumstancesofthecase,the " r  Stateparty,havingfailedtodetermineappropriatelywhetherasubstantial  l  riskoftortureexistedsuchastoforeclosetheauthorsdeportation,isunder  f  anobligation(a)tomakereparationtotheauthorifitcomestolightthat `  torturewasinfactsufferedsubsequenttodeportation,and(b)totakesuch  Z  stepsasmaybeappropriatetoensurethattheauthorisnot,inthefuture, T  subjectedtotortureasaresultoftheeventsofhispresencein,andremoval N  from,theStateparty.TheStatepartyisalsounderanobligationtoavoid H  similarviolationsinthefuture,includingbytakingappropriatestepstoensure B thattheCommitteesrequestsforinterimmeasuresofprotectionwillbe < respected. :06 : DuedateforState  partyresponse    3November2004 6,  6 Dateofreply A7 d @38232@A3September2004F<:d @38232  @ F*59ddUUpUUp12(#(#,UU,pUU+  1'&v&v 1 Statepartyresponse  &v   TheStatepartyconteststheCommitteesViewsandsubmitsthatithasnot &v violateditsobligationsundertheCovenant.Therehasbeennoviolationof  p itsobligationsindeportingtheauthorwhilethecaseisunderconsideration j bytheCommittee,asneitherinterimmeasuresrequestsorindeedthe d CommitteesViewsarebindingontheStateparty.Astherewasno ^  substantialriskofirreparableharmuponremoval,andbecausetheauthor  X! posedathreattothesecurityofCanada,removalcouldnotbedelayed !R" pendingtheCommitteesdecision.Despitethenon-bindingnatureofinterim !L# measurerequeststheStatepartyensurestheCommitteethatitalwaysgives, "F$ asitdidinthiscase,carefulconsiderationtothem,andwillacceptthem #@% whereverpossible.Thisapproachshouldnotinanywaybeconstruedasa $: & diminutionofCanadascommitmenttohumanrightsoritsongoing %4!' collaborationwiththeCommittee.Decisionsoninterimmeasurerequests &."( willbemadeonacase-by-casebasis. '(#) Astothefindingofaviolationofarticle9,paragraph4,astheperiodofnine )%+ andahalfmonthsafterthefinalresolutionoftheconstitutionalityofthe *&, securitycertificateprocedurewastoolong,theStatepartyreiteratesthe +'- pointsmadeinitssubmissionpriortoconsideration,thatthedelayofnine , (. _ andahalfmonthswasattributabletotheauthor.Itsubmitsthatthe  reasonablenesshearingwasprolongedbetweenJuly1997andApril1998  toaccommodatetheauthorscounselofchoice.Neithertheauthornorhis  counselexpressedanyconcernwiththedelayandneverrequestedtheCourt  toexpeditethehearing.  Equally,theStatepartyconteststhefindingofaviolationofarticle13,   submittingthattheexpulsiondecisionwasconfirmedtobeinaccordance   withlawbytheSupremeCourtandthattheauthordidnotargueotherwise.   Theauthorwaspermittedtosubmitreasonsagainsthisexpulsionandthese    submissionswereconsideredbytheMinisterpriortoconcludingthathe z   constitutedadangertothesecurityofCanadaandthathefacedonlya t  minimalriskofharmupondeportation.Theauthorwasawarethatthe n  informationusedinthedeterminationofthereasonablenessofthesecurity h  certificateprocesswastobethebasisoftheassessmentofthedangerhe b  representedtothesecurityofCanada.IntheStatepartysview,article13 \  doesnotrequirethathebegivenalltheinformationavailabletotheState V and,consideringitwasanationalsecuritycase,theprocesswasfair. P However,inordertosimplifytheprocesswithrespecttowhetheraperson J whoisadangertothesecurityofCanadamayberemovedfromCanada, D theStatepartyconfirmsthatitnowaffordstoallpersonsthesame >  enhancedproceduralguarantees.Inparticular,alldocumentsusedtoform 8 thedangeropinionarenowprovidedtothepersonredactedforsecurity 2 concernsandtheyareentitledtomakesubmissions. ,| TheStatepartysubmitsthatitsdeterminationthattheauthordidnotfacea  p substantialriskoftortureuponremovalhasbeenconfirmedbysubsequent j events,includingaconversationbetweenaCanadianrepresentativeandthe d authorsmother,thelatterofwhomconfirmedthattheauthorwasingood ^ health,andavisitbytheauthortotheCanadianembassyinTehranon1  X October2002,duringwhichhedidnotcomplainofbeingill-treated. !R Fortheaforementionedreasons,theStatepartydisagreesthatitshould "F  makeanyreparationtotheauthororthatithasanyobligationstotake #@! furtherstepsinthiscase.Nevertheless,inOctober2002,Canadaindicated $: " toIranthatitexpectsittocomplywithitsinternationalhumanrights %4!# obligations,includingwithrespecttotheauthor. &."$   InitsreplytothelistofissuesoftheCommitteeagainstTorture,theState ("$& partysubmittedthatitwasinfullcompliancewithitsinternationalobligations )%' inthiscaseandthatitdidnotviolateitsobligationsunderarticle13 *&( Covenant.TheSupremeCourtofCanadaconcludedthattheprocess +') accordedtotheauthorwasconsistentwiththeprinciplesof_ fundamental , (* justiceguaranteedbytheCanadianCharterofRightsandFreedoms.The  Courtwassatisfiedthat_ Ahani_ ԀwasfullyinformedoftheMinisterscase  againsthimandgivenafullopportunitytorespond.Italsoconcludedthat  theproceduresfolloweddidnotprejudicetheauthor.Thedecisionto  removewasconfirmedtobeinaccordancewithlawbytheSupremeCourt  ofCanada.Canada,onthebasisofalloftheevidenceavailabletoit,   including_ Ahani_ stestimonyandextensivesubmissionsmadebyhiscounsel,   concludedthattheriskthattheauthorwouldfaceuponreturntoIranwas   only minimal.Indeed,Canadasdecisioninthisregardwasupheldatall    levelsofjudicialreviewandappeal.TheSupremeCourtofCanadaheld z   thattheMinistersdecisionthattheauthordidnotfaceasubstantialriskof t  tortureondeportationwas unassailable. n    Theauthorwasabletosubmitreasonsagainsthisremoval.Thedecisionto b  remove_ Ahani_ Ԁwastheresultofthebalancingbetweenthedangertheauthor \  representedtothesecurityofCanadaandtheriskhewouldfaceifreturned V tohiscountry.ThisprocessculminatedintheopinionissuedbytheMinister P that_ Ahani_ ԀconstitutesadangertothesecurityofCanadaandthathefaced J onlyaminimalriskofharmupondeportation.Inordertosimplifythe D processwithrespecttowhetherapersonwhoisadangertothesecurityof > CanadamayberemovedfromCanada,theCanadiangovernmentnow 8 affordsallsuchpersonsthesameenhancedproceduralguarantees.In 2 particular,alldocumentsusedtoformthedangeropinionarenowprovided ,| tothepersonredactedforsecurityconcernsandtheyareentitledtomake &v submissions.Xs1XXXs1-#! p  -#Xs1XXXs1U>#  2 Xs1XXXs1 _ CCPR_ ,_ CCPR_ /C/SR.2366(2006)   HumanRightsCommittee  Eighty-sixthsession  Summaryrecordofthesecondpart(public)*ofthe2366thmeeting   HeldatHeadquarters,NewYork,onThursday,30March2006,at3p.m.     Follow-uponViewsundertheOptionalProtocol   ProgressreportoftheSpecialRapporteurforFollow-uponViews t  1.  Mr._ Ando_ (SpecialRapporteurforFollow-uponViews)introducedhisreport,whichcompiled b  informationreceivedduringtheeighty-fifthandeighty-sixthsessionsoftheCommittee.Hewishedto \  requestdecisionsfromtheplenaryinrelationto V twocases. P 2.  Inthecaseof_ Ahani_ Ԁv.Canada(CommunicationNo.1051/2002(pp.11-12)),notingthatfollowing D theauthor'sdeportationtoIrantheCanadianauthoritieshadfollowedhissituationclosely,heproposed > thattheCommittee'scommentsshouldindicatethattheStateParty'sresponsehadbeensatisfactoryand 8 theCommitteedidnotintendtoconsiderthematteranyfurther. 2 #Xs1XXXs1>#x@  ... ,| Xs1XXXs110.  SirNigel_ Rodley_ ,turningtothecaseof_ Ahani_ Ԁv.Canada(CommunicationNo.1051/2002(pp. &v 11-12))saidtherehadbeennorealimprovementsincetheStateparty'spreviousunsatisfactoryresponse;  p theStatepartyhadlastspokenwiththeauthor'smotherinOctober2003,andhefoundthereferenceto j possibleassistancefromtheSpecialRapporteurontorturealmostoffensive.AlthoughtheCommittee d shoulddecidenottoconsiderthematteranyfurther,giventhatnoadverseinformationhadbeenreceived, ^ hedidnotbelievethattheCommittee'scommentsshoulddescribetheStateParty'sresponseas  X satisfactory. !R 11.  Mr._ Bhagwati_ expressedsupportforSirNigel_ Rodley_ 'sposition. "F 12.  TheChairpersonsaidtheStateparty'sresponsewascertainlynotsatisfactory;moreover,shefound $: ! thereferencetotheSpecialRapporteurontortureveryflippant.TheCommittee'scommentsshouldbe %4!" amendedtoread"TheCommitteedoesnotintendtoconsiderthismatteranyfurtherinthecurrent &."# circumstancesunderthefollow-upprocedurebutmaytakeitupagaininthefutureifcirc_ umstances_  '(#$ warrant". ("$% #Xs1XXXs1D#Xs1XXXs113.  Mr._ Wieruszewski_ expressedconcernthatpreciseinformationonthestatusofcaseswasnot *&' alwaysavailable.Forexample,inthecaseof_ Ominayak_ Ԁv.Canada(CommunicationNo.167/1984(pp. +'( 10-11))hewonderediftherewereanynewfactualelements;withregardtothecaseof_ Malakhovsky_ Ԁand , () _ Pikul_ Ԁv.Belarus(CommunicationNo.1207/2003(pp.8-10)),theStatepartycontinuedtorefutethe -)* Committee'sViewsyetdespitetheapparentlackofanynewinformation,theStateparty'sresponsehad  beensenttotheauthorforcomment.HeaskediftherewasanypointinsendingtheStateparty'sresponse  totheauthoriftherewasnonewinformationandwonderedwhethertheCommitteeneededtoreviewits  proceduresforfollow-uponViews.  14.  TheChairpersonnotedthattheBureauagreedwiththeneedtoreviewfollow-upproceduresand   wasaskinginterestedexpertstosignuptoparticipateindiscussionsonhowtomakefollow-upprocedures   moreeffective.Withaviewtohavingtheprogressreportasup-to-dateaspossible,itcouldbenoted,for   example,thattheCommitteehadraisedthecaseof_ Ominayak_ Ԁv.Canada(CommunicationNo.167/1984)   initsconcludingobservationsonthelastperiodicreportofCanadainOctober. z   15.  SirNigel_ Rodley_ saidthecurrentprocedureseemedtobethateithertheCommitteewassatisfied, n  atleastonthefacts,ortheresponsehadbeenunsatisfactory,inwhichcaseconsiderationofthematter h  wouldcontinue.Withregardtothe_ Malakhovsky_ Ԁand_ Pikul_ Ԁv.Belaruscase(CommunicationNo. b  1207/2003),perhapsthecommentcouldbewordedtoexpresstheCommittee'sregretattheStateParty's \  refusaltoaddresstheissueofthecompatibilityoftheapplicationofitslegislationwiththeCovenant, V althoughanyamendmentcouldlikewisebepostponedpendingtheCommittee'sreviewofitsfollow-up P procedures. J 16.  Mr._ Lallah_ ,referringtothe_ Ominayak_ Ԁcase,saidhesupportedtheChairperson'ssuggestionthat > theCommittee'sobservationsonitsdialoguewithCanadashouldbeincludedinthecommentssection.It 8 wouldalsobeusefultoincludethedatewhentheStatepartyhadbeenrequestedtoprovideanupdate, 2 althoughonlyiftherequesthadbeenmadesubsequenttothedialoguewiththeStateparty. ,| 17.  TheChairpersonsaidthattherequesthadbeenmadeafterthedialogueandthedatecould  p thereforebementioned. j #Xs1XXXs1^K#... d   ^  Xs1XXXs1_ CCPR_ ,_ CCPR_ /C/SR.2392(2006)   HUMANRIGHTSCOMMITTEE  Eightyseventhsession  SUMMARYRECORDOFTHE2392ndMEETING  Heldatthe_ Palais_ ԀWilson,Geneva,   onWednesday,26July2006,at11a.m.   ...   FOLLOWUPTOCONCLUDINGOBSERVATIONSONSTATEREPORTSANDTOVIEWS t  UNDERTHEOPTIONALPROTOCOL(agendaitem7) n  ReportoftheSpecialRapporteurforfollowuponViews(_ CCPR_ /C/87/R.3) b  ... V 15.Mr._ ANDO_ ,turningto_ Ominayak_ Ԁv.Canada(communicationNo.167/1984),saidthattherehadbeen J nonewdevelopments.Withregardto_ Waldman_ Ԁv.Canada(communicationNo.694/1996),theState D partyhadarguedthatunderCanadasfederalsystemeducationmattersfellwithintheexclusivejurisdiction > oftheprovinces. 8 16.Ms._ WEDGWOOD_ saidtheStatepartywaswellawarethattheCovenantappliedtoallentitiesof ,| federalStates;itsresponsewashighlyunsatisfactory.TheCommitteemightwishtoencouragetheFederal &v GovernmenttoissueapublicstatementacknowledgingtheexistenceofaviolationoftheCovenant,thus  p exertingpressureontheprovincialgovernmentconcernedtotakeremedialaction. j 17.Mr._ ANDO_ suggestedincludingareferencetoarticle50oftheCovenantintheCommitteesdecision. ^ 18.TheCHAIRPERSONsaidthattheSpecialRapporteurcouldpubliclyacknowledgetheviolationat !R theforthcomingpressconference,andthatapproachcouldbeincorporatedintheCommitteesworking !L methodsandusedasaprecedentforsimilarsituationsinthefuture. "F 19.Ms._ WEDGWOOD_ saidthatsincetheFederalGovernmentofCanadahadstatedthatithadno $: ! authorityinthepresentcase,shewonderedwhethertheCommitteecouldrequestameetingwiththe %4!" authoritiesoftheProvinceofOntario. &."# 20.Mr.SHEARERsaidthattheCommitteecouldsubmitarequesttotheFederalGovernmenttoprovide ("$% informationfromtheOntarioauthoritiesontheproblemstheyhadencounteredinimplementingthe )%& Committeesdecision.AsimilarapproachhadbeentakeninapreviouscaseregardingAustralia,inwhich *&' informationhadbeenrequestedfromtheGovernmentofTasmania. +'( 21.Mr.OFLAHERTYsupportedtheviewsexpressedbyMs._ Wedgwood_ ԀandMr.Shearer. -)* Ї22.Mr.AMORexpressedconcernthatsuchanapproachwouldweakentheimpactofarticle50,which  statedthattheCovenantappliedto allpartsoffederalStateswithoutanylimitationsorexceptions.  23.TheCHAIRPERSONsaidthat,inherview,theimpactofarticle50wouldnotbeweakenedifthe  CommitteecontactedtheFederalGovernmenttorequestinformationfromtheOntarioauthorities.  Pursuanttoarticle50,theCommitteecouldrequestinformationfromauthoritiesotherthanafederal   Government,butcouldnotbypassafederalGovernmentwhendoingso.Themostsuitablesolutiontothe   problemwouldbethatsuggestedbyMr.Shearer.   ... z   #Xs1XXXs1X#  t  Xs1XXXs1TRX3'LetterX3'Avery 12-294/295 Laser Ta3'LetterscapeX3'3'Letter2-294/295 Laser Ta   ofthT _ CCPR_ ,A/61/40vol.I(2006)   ...  L  M  CHAPTERVIFOLLOW-UPACTIVITIESUNDERTHEOPTIONALPROTOCOL   227.InJuly1990,theCommitteeestablishedaprocedureforthemonitoringoffollow-uptoitsViews   underarticle5,paragraph4,oftheOptionalProtocol,andcreatedthemandateoftheSpecialRapporteur   forfollow-uptoViewstothiseffect.Mr._ Ando_ ԀhasbeentheSpecialRapporteursinceMarch2001 z   (seventy-firstsession). t  228.In1991,theSpecialRapporteurbegantorequestfollow-upinformationfromStatesparties.Such h  informationhasbeensystematicallyrequestedinrespectofallViewswithafindingofaviolationof b  Covenantrights;429Viewsoutofthe547Viewsadoptedsince1979concludedthattherehadbeena \  violationoftheCovenant. V 229.Allattemptstocategorizefollow-uprepliesbyStatespartiesareinherentlyimpreciseandsubjective: J itaccordinglyisnotpossibletoprovideaneatstatisticalbreakdownoffollow-upreplies.Manyfollow-up D repliesreceivedmaybeconsideredsatisfactory,inthattheydisplaythewillingnessoftheStatepartyto > implementtheCommitteesrecommendationsortoofferthecomplainantanappropriateremedy.Other 8 repliescannotbeconsideredsatisfactorybecausetheyeitherdonotaddresstheCommitteesViewsatall 2 oronlyrelatetocertainaspectsofthem.Somerepliessimplynotethatthevictimhasfiledaclaimfor ,| compensationoutsidestatutorydeadlinesandthatnocompensationcanthereforebepaid.Stillother &v repliesindicatethatthereisnolegalobligationontheStatepartytoprovidearemedy,butthataremedy  p willbeaffordedtothecomplainantonanL  M  exgratiaL  M  Ԁbasis. j 230.Theremainingfollow-upreplieschallengetheCommitteesViewsandfindingsonfactualorlegal ^ grounds,constitutemuch-belatedsubmissionsonthemeritsofthecomplaint,promiseaninvestigationof  X thematterconsideredbytheCommitteeorindicatethattheStatepartywillnot,foronereasonoranother, !R giveeffecttotheCommitteesViews. !L 231.Inmanycases,theSecretariathasalsoreceivedinformationfromcomplainantstotheeffectthatthe #@  CommitteesViewshavenotbeenimplemented.Conversely,inrareinstances,thepetitionerhasinformed $: ! theCommitteethattheStatepartyhadinfactgiveneffecttotheCommitteesrecommendations,even %4!" thoughtheStatepartyhadnotitselfprovidedthatinformation. &."# 232.Thepresentannualreportadoptsthesameformatforthepresentationoffollow-upinformationas ("$% thelastannualreport.Thetablebelowdisplaysacompletepictureoffollow-uprepliesfromStatesparties )%& receivedupto7July2006,inrelationtoViewsinwhichtheCommitteefoundviolationsoftheCovenant. *&' Whereverpossible,itindicateswhetherfollow-uprepliesareorhavebeenconsideredassatisfactoryor +'( unsatisfactory,intermsoftheircompliancewiththeCommitteesViews,orwhetherthedialoguebetween , () theStatepartyandtheSpecialRapporteurforfollow-uptoViewscontinues.TheNotesfollowinga -)* numberofcaseentriesconveyanideaofthedifficultiesincategorizingfollow-upreplies.  233.  Follow-upinformationprovidedbyStatespartiesandbypetitionersortheirrepresentatives  subsequenttothelastannualreport(A/60/40,vol.I,chap.VI)issetoutinannexVIItovolumeIIofthe  presentannualreport.   TRO'3Letter LandscapeX3'Letter'3Letter LandscapeX3'3'LetterscapeX3'TL  M  L  M  FOLLOW-UPRECEIVEDTODATEFORALLCASESOFVIOLATIONSOFTHECOVENANT   e*:D;ddUUpUUp59e.e.,dd ,` dd ,dd ,dd ,dd ,edd ,dd +  $ $Stateparty L andnumber  F ofcaseswith  @ violation ' : 'L  M  L  M  Communicationnumber, L  authorandlocation ' F  'L  M  L  M  Follow-upresponse L  receivedfromState  F  partyandlocation ' @  'L  M  L  M  Satisfactory L response ' F 'L  M  L  M  Unsatisfactory L response ' F 'L  M  L  M  No L follow-up  F response  @ received ' : 'L  M  L  M  Follow-up L dialogue  F ongoing  @ ...  x    x    x    x    x    x    x  Canada(11) V   &P !)) &L  M  L  M  24/1977,L  M  LovelaceL  M   V " SelectedDecisions, P # vol.1L  M  L  M  L  M  L  M  L  M   J $ L  M  L  M  X V % SelectedDecisions, P & vol.2,annex1  J ' X  V (   V )   V *   V +   $t + 27/1978,L  M  _ Pinkney_ L  M    , SelectedDecisions, - vol.1  |.    /    0    1 X   2 X   3   3 167/1984,L  M  _ Ominayak_ Ԁetal.L  M    Z4 A/45/50  T5 L  M  L  M  X  Z6 L  M  A/59/40,*A/61/40  T7    Z8    Z9    Z: X   Z;   .~; L  M  L  M  *L  ԀM  NoteL  M  :Accordingtothisreport,informationwasprovidedon25Novemberin1995(unpublished).Itappearsfromthe < Followupfilethatinthisresponse,theStatepartystatedthattheremedywastoconsistofacomprehensivepackageof = benefitsand_ programmes_ Ԁvaluedat$45millionanda95squaremilereserve.Negotiationswerestillongoingasto > whethertheBandshouldreceiveadditionalcompensation.  ?   ? L  M  L  M  359/1989,L  M  _ Ballantyne_ Ԁand ^@ DavidsonL  M   XA A/48/40  RB L  M  L  M  X ^C L  M  A/59/40*  XD X  ^E   ^F   ^G   ^H    L  M  L  M  *L  M  NoteL  M  :Accordingtothisreport,informationwasprovidedon2December1993,butwasunpublished.Itappearsfrom d theFollowupfilethatinthisresponse,theStatepartystatedthatsections58and68oftheCharteroftheFrench ^  Language,thelegislationwhichwascentraltothecommunication,willbemodifiedbyBill86(_ S.Q._ Ԁ1993,c.40).The X datefortheentryintoforceofthenewlawwastobearoundJanuary1994.  R   , | L  M  L  M  385/1989,L  M  McIntyreL  M     L  M  A/48/40    X*    X                        L  M  L  M  L  M  *L  M  NoteL  M  :SeefootnoteonCase359/1989above.   h    B   L  M  L  M  455/1991,L  M  SingerL  M      L  M  A/49/40    L  M  L  M  Findingofaviolation   wasconsideredsufficient    X                    L  M  L  M  469/1991,L  M  _ Ng_ L  M   .~  L  M  A/49/40  (x  L  M  L  M  X .~  L  M  A/59/40*  (x  X  .~    .~    .~    .~    R  L  M  L  M  *L  M  NoteL  M  :Accordingtothisreport,informationwasprovidedon3Octoberin1994(unpublished).TheStateparty  transmittedtheViewsoftheCommitteetotheGovernmentoftheUnitedStatesofAmericaandaskeditforinformation  concerningthemethodofexecutioncurrentlyinuseintheStateofCalifornia,wheretheauthorfacedcriminalcharges.  TheGovernmentoftheUnitedStatesofAmericainformedCanadathatthelawintheStateofCaliforniacurrently   providesthatanindividualsentencedtocapitalpunishmentmaychoosebetweengasasphyxiationand_ lethalinjection_ .In ! theeventofafuturerequestforanextraditionwiththepossibilityofthedeathpenalty,theViewsoftheCommitteein " thiscommunicationwillbetakenintoaccount.  #    # L  M  L  M  633/1995,L  M  _ Gauthier_ L  M    p$ A/54/40L  M  L  M  L  M  L  M   j% L  M  L  M  X  p& A/55/40,A/56/40, j' A/57/40L  M  L  M  L  M  L  M  L  M   d( L  M  L  M  X  p) L  M  A/59/40  j*    p+    p,    p-   >- 694/1996,L  M  _ Waldman_ L  M   . A/55/40  / X 0 A/55/40,A/56/40, 1 A/57/40,A/59/40, 2 A/61/40   3   4 X  5   6 X  7    829/1998,L  M  JudgeL  M   d  A/58/40  ^ X d A/59/40,A/60/40  ^ X d L  M  A/60/40, ^ A/61/40  X   d   d  L  M  L  M  X* d  L  M  A/60/40  ^    2  L  M  L  M  *L  M  NoteL  M  :TheCommitteedecidedthatitshouldmonitortheoutcomeoftheauthorssituationandtakeanyappropriate   action.          L  M  L  M  1051/2002,L  M  _ Ahani_ L  M    n L  M  A/59/40   h L  M  L  M  X  n L  M  A/60/40,A/61/40   h    n X   n    n L  M  L  M  X*  n L  M  A/60/40   h     L  M  L  M  *L  M  NoteL  M  :TheStatepartywentsomewaytoimplementingtheViews:theCommitteehasnotspecificallysaid   implementationissatisfactory.    ...  .~    .~    .~    .~    .~    .~   .~     X  TRX3'LetterO'3Letter Landscape3'LetterX3' Le'3Letter LandscapeX3'TCEUS., _ CCPR_ ,A/61/40vol.II(2006)   ...  AnnexVII  D  FOLLOW-UPOFTHEHUMANRIGHTSCOMMITTEEONINDIVIDUALCOMMUNICATIONS   UNDERTHEOPTIONALPROTOCOLTOTHEINTERNATIONALCOVENANTONCIVILAND   POLITICALRIGHTS   jThisreportsetsoutallinformationprovidedbyStatespartiesandauthorsortheircounselsincethelast t  AnnualReport(A/60/40).  n   ... h  US.,CE.,*<= dddd ` dd ` dd dd dd edd edd :D;e(#e(#,bUU,UU+  1'\ \  1UKUS., Stateparty US.,UK.,  \   CANADA 6,\   6 Case  n  Judge,829/1998 6,n  6 Viewsadoptedon  0  5August2002 6,0  6 Issuesand  violationsfound    BearinginmindthattheStatepartyhasabolishedcapitalpunishment,the  decisiontodeporttheauthortoastatewhereheisundersentenceofdeath  withoutaffordinghimtheopportunitytoavailhimselfofanavailableappeal,  wastakenarbitrarilyandinviolationofarticle6,paragraph1,aloneandread  togetherwitharticle2,paragraph3. ?5  ? Remedy L recommended  F  Anappropriateremedywhichwouldincludemakingsuchrepresentationsas L ispossibletothereceivingstatetopreventthecarryingoutofthedeathpenalty F ontheauthor. ?5@   ? DuedateforState !R! partyresponse A7 !L" @37936@A 37936 aW?!R# @37936  @ a DateofState #$ partysresponse  $ %  9May2006(Previouslyrespondedon8August2004and17November #& 2003) ?5$ '  ? Stateparty z&!( response  t'")  On9May2006,andfollowingtheSpecialRapporteursrequesttotheState z&!* partytoprovideanupdatefromtheUnitedStatesauthoritiesontheauthors t'"+ situation,theStatepartyreiterateditsresponseoutlinedintheFollowup n(#, Report(_ CCPR_ /C/80/FU1)andtheAnnualReport h)$- (_ CCPR_ /C/81/_ CRP_ .1/Add.6).Itaddedthaton18January2006,ithadsent b*%. adiplomaticnotetotheUnitedStatesreiteratingitspreviousnoteand \+&/ requestinganupdateonthestatusofMr.Judge.TheUnitedStates V,'0 acknowledgedreceiptofthenoteandforwardedittotheGovernorof  Pennsylvania,forhisconsideration.TodatetheGovernmenthasnotreceived  areplybuttothebestofitsknowledgenodatehasbeensetforhisexecution.  TheStatepartyrequeststhatthiscaseberemovedfromconsiderationunder  thefollowupprocedure. ?5  ? Authorsresponse  Z   Inaletterreceivedon12October2005theauthorhadinformedthe Z  CommitteethatnomeasureshavebeentakenbyCanadatoimplementthe T  Committeesrecommendation. ?5N    ? Case  `   _ Ominayak_ ,167/1984 ?5`   ? Viewsadoptedon  "   26March1990 ?5"   ? Issuesand   violationsfound     MinorityrightsArticle27 ?5   ? Remedy P recommended  J  Historicalinequities,towhichtheStatepartyrefers,andcertainmorerecent P developmentsthreatenthewayoflifeandcultureofthe_ Lubicon_ ԀLakeBand, J andconstituteaviolationofarticle27solongastheycontinue.TheState D partyproposestorectifythesituationbyaremedythattheCommitteedeems > appropriatewithinthemeaningofarticle2oftheCovenant.-#!8  -*p>? d dbUUbUU<=e(#e(#p,bUU,UU+  1'JJ 1UKUS., DuedateforState J partyresponse  D  Norecordofdate ?5J  ? DateofState  partysresponse    25November1995 ?5  ? Stateparty r response  l   TheCommitteewillrecallthatinafollowupresponseof25Novemberin r  1995,theStatepartystatedthattheremedywastoconsistofacomprehensive l ! packageofbenefitsandprogrammesvaluedat$45millionanda95square f!" milereserve.Atthetime,negotiationswerestillongoingastowhetherthe `"# Bandshouldreceiveadditionalcompensation. ?5Z#$  ? Authorsresponse  %l %  ManypetitionshavebeenreceivedinthemonthsofJanuaryandFebruary %l & 2006,fromvariousindividualsinFrance(relationshiptoauthorsunknown), &f!' requestingtheCommitteetofollowuponthiscaseandclaimingthatthe '`"( currentsituationofthe_ Lubicon_ ԀLakeBandis intolerable. ?5 (Z#)  ? Committees )%* Decision  *&+  PursuanttotheCommitteesconsiderationoftheStatepartysreport,during )%, theeightyfifthsession,theCommitteeadoptedthefollowingConcluding *&- Observationwithrespecttothiscase: +'.  , (/  TheCommitteeisconcernedthatlandclaimnegotiationsbetweenthe  GovernmentofCanadaandthe_ Lubicon_ ԀLakeBandarecurrentlyatan  impasse.ItisalsoconcernedaboutinformationthatthelandoftheBand  continuestobecompromisedbyloggingandlargescaleoilandgasextraction,  andregretsthattheStatepartyhasnotprovidedinformationonthisspecific  issue.(arts.1and27).US.,UK.,º-#!    -*p@A ddbUUbUU>?e(#e(#p,bUU,UU+  1'T T  1UKUS.,  T   TheCommitteeconsideredthat TheStatepartyshouldmakeeveryeffortto T  resumenegotiationswiththe_ Lubicon_ ԀLakeBand,withaviewtofindinga N   solutionwhichrespectstherightsoftheBandundertheCovenant,asalready H   foundbytheCommittee.ItshouldconsultwiththeBandbeforegranting B  licencesforeconomicexploitationofthedisputedland,andensurethatinno <  casesuchexploitationjeopardizestherightsrecognizedundertheCovenant. 6  (_ CCPR_ /C/CAN/CO75). ?50   ? Case  B  _ Waldman_ ,694/1996 ?5B  ? Viewsadoptedon    3November1999 ?5  ? Issuesand v violationsfound  p  DiscriminationoffundinginreligiousschoolsArticle26. ?5v  ? Remedy 2 recommended  ,|  Underarticle2,paragraph3(a),oftheCovenant,theStatepartyisunderthe 2 obligationtoprovideaneffectiveremedythatwilleliminatethisdiscrimination. ?5,|  ? DuedateforState > partyresponse  8  5February2000 ?5>  ? DateofState  partysresponse    Statepartyhadrespondedon3February2000(seefollowupinformationin  A/55/40,A/56/40,A/57/40,A/59/40) ?5   ? Stateparty f!! response  `""  Initsnoteof3February2000,theStatepartyinformstheCommitteethat f!# mattersofeducationfallundertheexclusivejurisdictionoftheprovinces.The `"$ GovernmentofOntariohascommunicatedthatithasnoplanstoextend Z#% fundingtoprivatereligiousschoolsortotheparentsofchildrenthatattendsuch T$& schools,andthatitintendstoadherefullytoitsconstitutionalobligationtofund N% ' RomanCatholicschools. ?5H&!(  ? Committees  (Z#) Decision  )T$*  PursuanttotheCommitteesconsiderationoftheStatepartysreport,during  (Z#+ theeightyfifthsession,theCommitteeadoptedthefollowingConcluding )T$, Observationwithrespecttothiscase, )N%-  TheCommitteeexpressesconcernabouttheStatepartysresponsesrelating +B'/ totheCommitteesViewsinthecaseof_ Waldman_ Ԁv.Canada, ,<(0 (communicationNo.694/1996),Viewsadoptedon3November1999),  requestingthatandeffectiveremedybygrantedtotheauthoreliminating  discriminationonthebasisofreligioninthedistributionofsubsidiestoschools  (arts.2,18and26).  US.,UK.,TheCommitteeconsideredthat, TheStatepartyshouldadoptstepsinorder   toeliminatediscriminationonthebasisofreligioninthefundingofschoolsin   Ontario.(_ CCPR_ /C/CAN/CO75). ?5   ? Case  H    _ Mansour_ Ԁ_ Ahani_ ,1051/2002 ?5H    ? Viewsadoptedon   Z   23March2004 ?5 Z   ? Issuesand   violationsfound     Removaltoacountrywheretheauthorriskstortureand/orexecutionArticles   7,9,paragraph4,13. ?5   ? Remedy  recommended    Inaccordancewitharticle2,paragraph3(a),oftheCovenant,theStateparty  isunderanobligationtoprovidetheauthorwithaneffectiveremedy,including  compensation.Inthelightofthecircumstancesofthecase,theStateparty, | havingfailedtodetermineappropriatelywhetherasubstantialriskoftorture v existedsuchastoforeclosetheauthorsdeportation,isunderanobligation(a) p tomakereparationtotheauthorifitcomestolightthattorturewasinfact j sufferedsubsequenttodeportation,and(b)totakesuchstepsasmaybe d appropriatetoensurethattheauthorisnot,inthefuture,subjectedtotorture ^ asaresultoftheeventsofhispresencein,andremovalfrom,theStateparty. X TheStatepartyisalsounderanobligationtoavoidsimilarviolationsinthe R future,includingbytakingappropriatestepstoensurethattheCommittees L requestsforinterimmeasuresofprotectionwillberespected.-#!F  -*pBC d dbUUbUU@Ae(#e(#p,bUU,UU+  1' X X 1UKUS., DuedateforState  X partyresponse  !R