Примеры использования Authors have not exhausted на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
The State party considers that the authors have not exhausted all domestic remedies.
It argues that the authors have not exhausted domestic remedies, and considers that their claims under articles 14, paragraph 1, and 26 are manifestly illfounded.
Additionally, the State party argues that the authors have not exhausted all domestic remedies.
Consequently, the authors have not exhausted domestic remedies in accordance with article 5, paragraph 2(b), of the Optional Protocol.
With reference to articles 7, 9(paras. 1 and4) and 10(para. 1), the authors have not exhausted domestic remedies.
The State party contends that the authors have not exhausted domestic remedies and requests the Committee to declare the case inadmissible.
With regard to the exhaustion of domestic remedies, the State party submits that the authors have not exhausted any domestic remedies.
We, however, note that the above four authors have not exhausted domestic remedies in accordance with article 4, paragraph 1, of the Optional Protocol.
As to the complaint of unreasonably lengthy proceedings, the State party considers that the authors have not exhausted all domestic remedies.
Concerning admissibility, it claims that the authors have not exhausted domestic remedies in accordance with article 5, paragraph 2(b), of the Optional Protocol.
With reference to articles 7, 9(paras. 1 and 4), 10(para. 1), 17(para. 1), 23(para.1) and 24(para. 1), the authors have not exhausted domestic remedies.
Since the investigation is still ongoing, the authors have not exhausted all available domestic remedies, and therefore the Committee should consider the communication inadmissible.
It therefore concludes that this part of the communication is inadmissible under article 5, paragraph 2(b), of the Optional Protocol, since the authors have not exhausted all available domestic remedies in that respect.
The State party also contends that the authors have not exhausted domestic remedies and could, therefore, still elaborate more on their interest in changing their family names.
The State party considers, therefore,that the requirements of article 5, paragraph 2(b), have not been met, since the authors have not exhausted all domestic remedies to redress the alleged violation.
On the State party's argument that the authors have not exhausted domestic remedies, the authors note that constitutional provisions are superior to other sources of law.
By submissions of 1 September, 17 December 1993, 24 January and 19 April 1994,the State party argues that the communication is inadmissible under article 22, paragraph 5(b), of the Convention, because the authors have not exhausted domestic remedies.
On admissibility, the State party claims that the authors have not exhausted all available domestic remedies.
Therefore, in the absence of an explanation from the authors to demonstrate that, in their case, this remedy was not available orwas not effective, the Committee concludes that the authors have not exhausted all domestic remedies.
The claim under article 18 should be held inadmissible because the authors have not exhausted the available and effective remedy of requesting partial exemption.
It takes the view that the authors have not exhausted the domestic remedies available under Algerian law and themselves acknowledge that the case was still under investigation and still pending before the Indictments Chamber when they submitted it to the Committee on 5 January 1999.
The State party submits that the communication be considered inadmissible given that the authors have not exhausted all effective, available domestic remedies as prescribed in article 22, paragraph 5(b), of the Convention.
Thus, according to the State party, the authors have not exhausted all available domestic remedies and there are no grounds to believe that these remedies would be unavailable or ineffective.
The State party concludes that the Committee has no competence in respect of activities of UNMIK andits personnel under the Optional Protocol, and that the authors have not exhausted domestic remedies available in the State party and in Kosovo.
The Committee notes that,according to the State party, the authors have not exhausted domestic remedies, since they didnot consider the possibility of bringing the matter before the investigating judge and suing for damages in criminal proceedings.
Since the case is being actively heard by the latter instance, the authors have not exhausted domestic remedies within the meaning of article 2 of the Optional Protocol.
The Committee notes the State party's argument to the effect that the authors have not exhausted domestic remedies, on the ground that they did not consider the possibility of bringing the matter before the investigating judge and suing for damages in criminal proceedings under articles 72 and 73 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
As regards the authors' claim under article 17 of the Covenant,the State party contends that the authors have not exhausted domestic remedies in this respect, since they did not argue before the Dutch authorities that the refusal to have their surnames changed constituted an unlawful or arbitrary interference with their privacy.
In the present case, the authors had not exhausted such remedies.
It argues that the author has not exhausted domestic remedies.