Примеры использования Requirement to exhaust на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
The requirement to exhaust all available domestic remedies.
He requests the Committee to exempt him from the requirement to exhaust them.
However, this did not exempt him from the requirement to exhaust domestic remedies, in accordance with article 22, paragraph 5(b), of the Convention.
The Committee recalls its jurisprudence that mere doubts about theeffectiveness of domestic remedies, do not absolve an author of the requirement to exhaust them.
It is the practice of the Court to waive the requirement to exhaust domestic remedies.
In this context,the Committee recalls its jurisprudence that mere doubts about the effectiveness of domestic remedies do not absolve an author of the requirement to exhaust them.
The State party maintains, therefore, that the requirement to exhaust all domestic remedies, in accordance with article 5, paragraph 2(b), of the Covenant, has not been met.
Their failure to procure expert information prior to their appeal, but only seven years after their trial,does not absolve the authors from the requirement to exhaust available domestic remedies.
In relation to the requirement to exhaust domestic remedies, the author claims that she did not have entire control over the delays in taking action on her case.
A person's subjective belief or presumption that a certain remedy is futile does not absolve him/her of the requirement to exhaust all domestic remedies: 107 the relevant remedy must be objectively futile.
The Committee recalls that its assessment of the requirement to exhaust available and effective domestic remedies, as required by article 5, paragraph 2(b), of the Optional Protocol takes place at the time of its consideration of the communication.
The author therefore requested the Committee to uphold its position that, due to the impossibility to obtain legal aid,he should be exempt from the requirement to exhaust domestic remedies in Azerbaijan.
The Committee has consistently emphasized that the requirement to exhaust domestic remedies applies only to the extent that those remedies are effective and available.
The complainant's alleged mental andemotional problems at the time of the second Uppsala District Court expulsion order(in 1997) also did not absolve him from the requirement to exhaust domestic remedies.
The Committee recalledthat in article 14, paragraph 7, of the Convention, the requirement to exhaust domestic remedies does not apply if the application of the remedies is unreasonably prolonged.
It also notes that, according to the author, available remedies to challenge his detention are neither effective nor accessible and that,consequently, derogation from the requirement to exhaust domestic remedies is justifiable.
The author recalls that there are exceptions to the requirement to exhaust domestic remedies when there is little chance of success or when additional remedies would cause unreasonable delays.
The State party recalls the Committee's jurisprudence to the effect that a person's subjective belief in, orpresumption of, the futility of a remedy does not exempt that person from the requirement to exhaust all domestic remedies.
With reference to the Committee's jurisprudence,the authors argue that the requirement to exhaust all available domestic remedies applies insofar as such remedies appear to be effective in the particular communication.
The State party recalls the Committee's jurisprudence to the effect that a person's subjective belief in, or presumption of, the futility of a remedy does not exempt that person from the requirement to exhaust all domestic remedies.
This collective nature of the complaints procedure is the reason why there is no requirement to exhaust domestic remedies under the protocol, nor any requirement that the organization lodging a complaint be a victim.
Moreover, through these proceedings, the State party was given an opportunity to remedy the alleged violation of article 22 of the Covenant, which,according to the Committee's jurisprudence, is the main purpose of the requirement to exhaust domestic remedies.
The Committee recalls that mere doubts about the effectiveness of domestic remedies do not absolve an author of the requirement to exhaust them, and that the fulfilment of reasonable procedural rules is the responsibility of the applicant himself.
Regarding the requirement to exhaust available domestic remedies, the author notes that, according to the Committee's case law, the rule of exhaustion of domestic remedies may be mitigated in circumstances in which the authorities have failed to act with due diligence.
As to the State party's argument that mere"subjective belief orpresumption" does not exempt the author of a communication from the requirement to exhaust all domestic remedies, the author cites articles 45 and 46 of Ordinance 06-01.
With regard to the requirement to exhaust domestic remedies, the Committee notes the State party's contention that the communications do not meet the requirements of article 5, paragraph 2(b), of the Optional Protocol and should therefore be declared inadmissible.
In his first submission, made in English, on 15 December 2008, he referred to the Committee's case law, which indicates that the requirement to exhaust all domestic remedies does not necessarily oblige the complainant to obtain a decision from the highest national court.
As to the requirement to exhaust domestic remedies, the Committee notes that the majority of the claims are based on the allegation that from the time of the authors' arrest until their conviction, the interpretation provided by the State party was so inadequate as to result in numerous violations of their rights under article 9 and article 14.
In the modern world, where the rights of an individual could be affected even ifthat individual was at a great distance from the State committing the injury, the requirement to exhaust local remedies could raise insurmountable obstacles, even if the situations described in paragraphs(a) to(c) were not applicable.
The author again refers to the State party's argument that the requirement to exhaust domestic remedies calls on the author to institute criminal proceedings by filing a complaint with the investigating judge, in accordance with articles 72 et seq.(paras. 25 ff) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.