Примеры использования Author has made на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
One feels that the author has made a gigantic journalistic work.
At the same time as a young audience, andhis parents are completely miss all the wrong educational model, which the author has made an overtone series, almost by accident.
The Committee notes that the author has made specific and detailed allegations concerning his arrest and trial.
With regard to the conditions of detention on death row atSt. Catherine's District Prison, the Committee notes that the author has made specific allegations, about the deplorable conditions of his detention.
The Committee therefore considers that the author has made timely and reasonable attempts to complain about the alleged ill-treatment and discrimination.
The author has made a variety of further attempts to secure redress through the Prime Minister, the Minister of National Revenue and Members of Parliament.
Given the nature of the issues under consideration, the Committee is of the view that the author has made a sufficient effort to bring his complaints before the national authorities.
The Committee notes that the author has made specific and detailed allegations concerning his punishment. The State party has not responded to these allegations.
In relation to the author's claim that his son was not presumed innocent until proved guilty, the author has made detailed submissions which the State party has failed to address.
With the series"In the light", the author has made a discovery, which has no precedent in the world, and it is possible that this approach may become a new direction in photography.
With regard to the author's complaints of illtreatment while in detention at St. Catherine's District Prison, the Committee notes that the author has made very precise allegations, relating to the incidents where he was beaten paragraph 3.3 supra.
While the author has made an allegation under article 10, paragraph 1, in respect of his treatment the Committee need not address this claim in the light of its finding under article 7 in paragraph 6.2 above.
The Committee does not accept the State party's argument that the author's claims are inadmissible on grounds of non-substantiation, as the author has made reasonable efforts to substantiate her claims of violations of the Covenant for the purposes of admissibility.
While the author has made certain general observations relating to the pardon or commutation procedures in the State party, he has not argued that he has submitted an application for pardon or commutation that has been rejected.
With regard to the author's alleged ill-treatment and lack of medical attention at St. Catherine District Prison,the Committee notes that the author has made very precise allegations, which he documented in complaints to the prison authorities and to the parliamentary ombudsman of Jamaica.
The Committee notes that the author has made specific allegations, notably insofar as they relate to passages in the report of the Police Commissioner of South Australia which had been made available to the LLC, to support his contention that his national and/or ethnic background influenced the decision of the LLC.
With regard to the conditions of detention, the State party notes that the author has made only general allegations, such as that he was confined in a single cell for 22 hours per day and that much of his time was spent in enforced darkness.
The Committee further notes that the author has made several other general and unspecified allegations of violation of provisions of the Covenant, without providing meaningful evidence to substantiate his claims of violations of article 6, article 7, article 9, paragraphs 1 and 5; article 10, paragraph 1, article 12; article 13; article 14; article 15; article 16; article 17; and article 26 of the Covenant by Canada.
Other authors have made important points on the issue of civil society funding.
The Committee considered that the author had made a reasonable effort to substantiate his allegations, for purposes of admissibility.
The PRRA officer noted that the author had made no mention of political persecution or of her family's political activities in Guinea in her PRRA and H&C applications.
Since both the State party and the author have made observations as to the merits of the communication, the Committee proceeds to the examination to the merits of the case.
She notes that the authors have made diligent efforts to obtain these documents but were unable to obtain them.
The Committee considers that, in these circumstances, the authors have made diligent efforts to obtain the documents and that the delays must be attributed to the State party.
Authors have made an attempt to explain the similarity of these phenomena by the features of hydrogen bonds that are present in the objects.
Furthermore, the written judgement of the Court of Appeal reveals that the issue of self-incrimination without prior cautioning by the police was raised during the trial,when N. W. testified that the author had made his statement after police cautioning.
In the circumstances, the Committee found that the author had made a reasonable effort to exhaust available domestic remedies and that the requirement of article 5, paragraph 2(b), did not prevent it from examining the author's claim.
The State party challenges the Committee's reasoning in finding that the author had made a reasonable effort to exhaust domestic remedies by appealing the Oslo City Court judgement without having the appeal cosigned by a lawyer.
To the extent that the authors have made a claim about the right to have access to Court under article 14, paragraph 1, of the Covenant, the Committee considers that they have not sufficiently substantiated this claim for purposes of admissibility.
To support her argumentation, the author quotes the jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee,which recognized in a particular case that the author had made reasonable efforts to demonstrate that the threat of enforcement and the pervasive impact of the continued existence of administrative practices and the public opinion had affected the author and continued to affect him personally.