Примеры использования Author also recalls на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
- 
                                                                                        Official
                                                                                    
 - 
                                                                                        Colloquial
                                                                                    
 
The author also recalls that there was a state of emergency between November 2001 and November 2002.
The author also recalls that the vice-president of Yuba Dubal had been the target of intimidation on the part of Awami League members more than once.
The author also recalls that the right to freedom of expression protects offensive and insulting speech, as well as that which is received positively.
The author also recalls that the declaration by Algeria of a state of emergency on 9 February 1992 does not affect the right to submit individual communications to the Committee.
The author also recalls her allegations that during the discovery of the 0.11 grams of heroin in her son's home, the official witnesses had not been present as they were asked to leave.
The author also recalls the conditions of his detention, and reaffirms that they amounted to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment under article 7 of the Covenant.
The author also recalls the steps taken with lawyers on two occasions by her family, with the purpose of initiating legal actions before the domestic courts and thereby exhausting domestic remedies.
The author also recalls the ban, pursuant to article 45 of Ordinance No. 06-01, on bringing any individual or collective proceedings against members of Algeria's defence and security forces.
The author also recalls that the Criminal Procedure Code in force at the time of the preliminary hearing did not provide for a possibility of being provided with a copy of the respective ruling and of appealing it.
The author also recalls that the decision of the Supreme Court of 24 August 2004 became executory on the same day it was taken and that, in these circumstances, all available domestic remedies have been exhausted.
The author also recalls that, according to the Committee's jurisprudence, the State party may not invoke the provisions of the Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation against persons who have submitted communications to the Committee.
The author also recalls that, because his brother was held incommunicado for more than 20 years and was subjected to torture, he was not treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person.
The author also recalls that according to the Committee's general comment No. 31(2004) on the nature of the general legal obligation imposed on States parties to the Covenant, failure to bring perpetrators to justice could give rise to a separate breach of the Covenant.
The author also recalls that, despite the State party's claim to the contrary, she has proved a personal interest before the Supreme Court, by stating that the outcome of the trial would have an indisputable direct bearing on the family's wealth.
The author also recalls that her family life has to date been marked by financial and emotional uncertainty, and that the children have been prevented from attending school, thereby denying them their right to education, and their family rights protected under article 17 and article 23, paragraph 1, of the Covenant.
The author also recalls general recommendation No. 19(1992) on violence against women, in which the Committee stated that gender-based violence that lessens or nullifies women's enjoyment of human rights constitutes discrimination against women within the meaning of article 1 of the Convention.
The author also recalls the Views of the Committee according to which:(i) the State party has a duty to carry out thorough investigations of alleged violations of human rights, particularly enforced disappearances or extrajudicial executions;(ii) if the State party does not conduct investigations into allegations of human rights violations, this may constitute a separate breach of article 2(para. 3) of the Covenant.
The authors also recall that they were threatened and kept under surveillance.
The authors also recall that, under article 45 of Ordinance No. 06-01, legal proceedings may not be brought by individuals or groups against members of the defence or security forces.
The authors also recall that, owing to the general detention conditions in which their fathers were or are still being held, in particular the isolating nature of detention and the lack of medical attention, both articles 7 and 10, paragraph 1, have been violated.
It also recalls that the author was not effectively represented at trial, in violation of article 14, paragraph 3(b) and d.
The Committee also recalls that the author made several attempts to change the conditions of his incarceration by complaining to his Aboriginal Deaths in Custody officer and to the Governor of the correctional centre.
The State party also recalls that the author alleges that the lawyers that the author  consulted asked for additional money(which he terms"extortion") due to the additional time required to review the large volume of documents he sought to present as evidence.
It also recalls that it has suggested that the author return, and has offered to place him in the witnessprotection programme in that event.
In this connection counsel also recalls the five days spent by the author  in the death cell in February 1988, and submits that the State party has not provided medical evidence that the author was sane at the time the warrant for execution was issued.
The Committee will also recall that the author refuted the information provided by the State party in its response to the Committee's Views.
The Committee also recalls that the authors, in their comments on the merits, reiterate their previous observations and indicate that they have been on the sanctions list for over five years.
The Committee will also recall that on 30 June 2009, the author commented on the State party's submission.
The Committee will also recall that on 30 June 2009, the author commented on the State party's submission.
The Committee will also recall that on 2 July 2009, the author submitted that the State party had failed to publish the Views and had failed to address the issue of undue delay in the proceedings.