Examples of using Were arbitrary in English and their translations into Arabic
{-}
-
Colloquial
-
Political
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Computer
The author considers that his arrest and detention were arbitrary.
The Committee has come to the conclusion that they were arbitrary and. consequently, in violation of article 9, paragraph 1, of the Covenant, for a number of reasons, each of which would, by itself, constitute a violation.
The authors consider that their arrest and detention were arbitrary.
The Committee concluded that those provisions were arbitrary and, consequently, in violation of article 9, paragraph 1, of the Covenant, for a number of reasons, each of which would, by itself, constitute a violation.
In those circumstances,the Committee is unable to conclude that the refusals in question were arbitrary.
But the author hasnot shown that the actions of the judicial bodies were arbitrary or denied her justice, and the State party considers that the complaint constitutes a clear abuse of the right to submit complaints.
The Working Group decidedthat his arrest and continued detention upon conviction were arbitrary.
Under the circumstances, it cannot be concluded that the author 's arrest and detention were arbitrary or not based" on such grounds and in accordance with such procedure as are established by law".
With regard to the legal aspects of the detention, the source refers to a violation of domestic legislation as the ground for maintaining that Sidi Fall 's detention and conviction were arbitrary.
The State party has not addressed the authors ' claims that theirson ' s arrest and detention were arbitrary or illegal, and that he has not been seen since 16 May 1996.
Similarly, they have not substantiated, for purposes of admissibility, that the reasons advanced by the Provincial Government andthe Administrative Court for rejecting their request for an exemption from the zoning regulations were arbitrary.
For this reason, the Committee considers thatthe author was deprived of her liberty during these two periods and that her detentions were arbitrary, which constitute a violation of article 9, paragraph 1, of the Covenant.
The Working Group decided that his arrest and continued detention were arbitrary, that his trial did not meet international standards for fairness, and that there was evidence that he might have been tortured while under detention.
The decision of the Appellate Court of Nepalgunj itself confirmed that his arrest and entire detention inthe Immamnagar Barracks and Banke District Jail were arbitrary and unlawful.
We find that there is nothing in the material before the Committee that indicates that the relevant courts 'decisions were arbitrary or that the author was unable to present his own view of the facts to the courts concerned.
The question presently before the Committee is whether, in their application to the author, the provisions of the DPSOA under which the author continued to be detained at the conclusion of his 14-year term of imprisonment were arbitrary.
The only reason the Committee would have for considering the current casewould be to show that the rulings handed down were arbitrary or that they violated the due process of the applicant, neither of which occurred.
The author states that he repeatedly requested that, in view of his age and his health, these court rulings be applied,but that the judicial decisions adopted in that regard were arbitrary and constituted a denial of justice.
B ' tselem, the human rights organization,stated that both his release and his arrest were arbitrary, noting that the IDF had rejected an identical request by the detainee to study abroad in 1996 on the grounds that he could pose a security threat from the Netherlands.
For this reason, the Committee considered thatthe author was deprived of her liberty during these two periods and that her detentions were arbitrary and in breach of article 9, paragraph 1, of the Covenant.
However, nothing in the information brought to the attention of the Committee concerning this matter shows that the decisions of the Ukrainian courts orthe behaviour of the competent authorities were arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice.
In the absence of adequate explanations from the State party concerning the claim that the apprehension andsubsequent incommunicado detention were arbitrary or illegal, the Committee found that the facts constituted a violation of article 9.
The Committee considers that the author has not substantiated, for purposes of admissibility, that the reasons given by the Dutch courts forrejecting his challenge to the admissibility of the prosecution ' s case were arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice.
The Committee considers that the author has not demonstrated, for purposes of admissibility, that the procedures conducted by thecourts of the State party in the author ' s case were arbitrary or constituted a denial of justice, and this part of the communication should therefore also be declared inadmissible under article 2 of the Optional Protocol.
Consequently, on the basis of the material before it, the Committee concludes that the author has failed to substantiate sufficiently for purposes of admissibility that the decisions of the State party 's courts were arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice.
The Committee considers that the author has failed to substantiate, for purposes of admissibility,that the conduct of the courts in the present case were arbitrary or amounted to denial of justice, and therefore declares these claims inadmissible under article 2 of the Optional Protocol.
The Committee recalls its constant jurisprudence that it is not a final instance competent to re-evaluate findings of fact or the application of domestic legislation,unless it can be ascertained that the proceedings before the domestic courts were arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice.
Similarly, it is not for the Committee to review specific instructions to the jury by the trial judge,unless it can be ascertained that the instructions to the jury were arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice, or that the judge manifestly violated his obligation of impartiality.
In the absence of adequate explanations from the State party concerning the author ' s allegations that her grandmother 's apprehension and subsequent incommunicado detention were arbitrary or illegal, the Committee finds a violation of article 9 with regard to Daouia Benaziza.
It is not, in principle, for the Committee to review the facts and evidence presented to, and evaluated by, the domestic courts,unless it can be ascertained that the proceedings were arbitrary, that there were procedural irregularities amounting to a denial of justice, or that the judge violated his obligation of impartiality.