Examples of using Has failed to substantiate in English and their translations into Chinese
{-}
-
Political
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Programming
Iraq also argues that Iran has failed to substantiate the amount claimed.
As a result of the absence of necessary evidence and explanations,the Panel finds that BEI has failed to substantiate its claim.
The author has failed to substantiate such a claim with regard to articles 2 and 26.
The Committee considers that the author has failed to substantiate this particular claim.
The complainant has failed to substantiate her allegations and the complaint should be declared inadmissible as being manifestly unfounded.
In this respect, the State party contends that the author has failed to substantiate his claim.
Consequently, the author has failed to substantiate this claim, for purposes of admissibility.
For these reasons, the State party considers that the author has failed to substantiate these allegations.
In the present case, the author has failed to substantiate, for the purposes of admissibility, that the secret ballot resulted in discrimination on the grounds set forth in article 2, paragraph 1.
The State party maintains that the complainant has failed to substantiate his claim about past abuse.
G/ With respect to legal fees incurred in closing the claimant' s office,the Panel finds that the claimant has failed to substantiate this portion of the claim.
The State party contends that the author has failed to substantiate his claim that his deportation from Canada would violate article 6.
The Committee observes that the complainant in the present case has failed to substantiate that he was in such danger.
The State party concludes that since Mr. Cox has failed to substantiate, for purposes of admissibility, his allegations, the communication should be declared inadmissible under article 2 of the Optional Protocol.
No information in substantiation of these claims has been adduced,and the author has failed to substantiate these claims, for the purposes of admissibility.
The State party concludes that the author has failed to substantiate her allegations of violations of her rights under the Convention.
The State party contested the admissibility of the communication,arguing that the author has failed to substantiate his claims under article 2 and article 7 of the Covenant.
Finally, the State party argues that the author has failed to substantiate his claim that he might be subjected to extrajudicial execution if returned to his country of origin.
The State party further submits that the author has failed to substantiate his claim that he had no time to prepare his defence.
Accordingly, the Committee considers that the author has failed to substantiate his claims under article 14, paragraphs 1 and 3(e), of the Covenant and thus declares them inadmissible under article 2 of the Optional Protocol.
In the light of the material before the Committee, the author has failed to substantiate, for the purpose of admissibility his claim of arbitrariness.
Finally, the State party argues that the author has failed to substantiate his claims under the Covenant in order to make a prima facie case.
In these circumstances, the Committee holds that the author has failed to substantiate his claim that his rights under article 14, paragraph 1, were violated in this respect.
On the merits, the State party submits that the petitioner has failed to substantiate his claims of racial discrimination and that the communication is thus without merit.
It found that the author had failed to substantiate that her husband had violated her physical integrity on 21 September 2007.
The complainants had failed to substantiate that they were to be regarded as refugees or aliens otherwise in need of protection and therefore entitled to asylum.
As regards the claim under article 14,the State party submits that the authors have failed to substantiate their claim that they did not receive a fair hearing.
The Committee observed that the complainant in the present case had failed to substantiate that he was in such danger.
The Committee considers further that the authors have failed to substantiate their claim, for purposes of admissibility, that the hearings concerning the determination of their pension rights were not fair.
The Committee therefore held this part of the communication inadmissible under article 2 of the Optional Protocol,because the author had failed to substantiate sufficiently her claim for the purposes of admissibility.