Примеры использования Nonderogable на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
What dimensions of rights were nonderogable?
The first paragraph would deal with nonderogable rights and the second with restrictions.
The reference to article 9 did not mean that it was included among the nonderogable rights.
The protection of those rights recognized as nonderogable require procedural guarantees, including judicial guarantees.
Article 2, paragraph 2,provides that the prohibition against torture is absolute and nonderogable.
States must ensure respect for all rights,in particular nonderogable rights such as the right to life and the prohibition of torture.
Ms. CHANET said the reference to article 9 was not intended to create a new nonderogable right.
It was appropriate to refer to the nonderogable rights in article 4.2 and the existence of other norms that were nonderogable. .
It made clear that the Committee had dealt with the issue of nonderogable rights on a number of occasions.
The Committee had already received a proposal from another human rights body that articles 19 and 14 of the Covenant should be made nonderogable.
It was true that the nonderogable rights outlined in article 4 were in some cases the same as those protected by customary international law.
The Inter-American Court of Human Rights ruled in 1987 that habeas corpus is a nonderogable right.
They were considered nonderogable either because of their peremptory nature or because they were viewed as unrelated to emergency situations.
The situation was different with reservations to provisions setting forth norms of jus cogens or nonderogable rules.
On the other hand,he agreed with Mr. Solari Yrigoyen about the nonderogable status of the provision of article 10.1 concerning humane treatment of prisoners.
The paragraph would then begin with a statement to the effect that article 4.2 clearly included two types of nonderogable norms.
He emphasized that any proposal to make an additional right nonderogable would need to be buttressed by arguments sufficiently firm to make it unchallengeable.
Mr. KRETZMER considered that all the prerequisites for a fair trial constituted nonderogable obligations.
Core obligations are nonderogable and represent the minimum essential levels which States are required to meet in order to be in compliance with the right to health.
Mr. KLEIN said he was not sure that all the aspects of a fair trial mentioned in article 14 constituted nonderogable obligations.
This applies a fortiori where a nonderogable right, such as the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, is involved.
Mr. SCHEININ drew the Committee'sattention to document CCPR/C/66/R.8/Rev.1, containing his second draft of the general comment on nonderogable rights.
The fact was the Committee considered that article 10.1 of the Covenant should have been listed as a nonderogable provision and was trying to find a way of incorporating it by reference.
The provisions of the Covenant relating to procedural safeguards could never be made subject to measures that would circumvent the protection of nonderogable rights.
The vast majority of international crimes perpetrated under State authority were covered by specific nonderogable rights or something recognized as a peremptory international norm.
Although article 4, paragraph 2, already spelled out the articles from which derogations could not be made,it should not be forgotten that the Second Optional Protocol also pronounced on nonderogable rights.
The nonderogable rights set forth in article 4 of the Civil and Political Covenant represent the core of overlapping rights protected under both human rights and humanitarian law.
It was also the case, however, in some of the issues that would be coming up,that there was an inextricable link to one of the nonderogable articles.
Mr. KRETZMER questioned the somewhat contrived approach adopted to justify the consideration of certain issues as nonderogable rights, namely by linking them to rights already specified as such in the Covenant.
In order to protect nonderogable rights, the right to take proceedings before a court to enable the court to decide without delay on the lawfulness of detention should not be diminished by a State party's decision to derogate from the Covenant.