Examples of using Working group concludes in English and their translations into Russian
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
On that basis the Working Group concludes that.
The Working Group concludes that the proposal must be maintained.
In light of the foregoing paragraphs, the Working Group concludes the following.
Consequently, the Working Group concludes that these allegations are substantiated.
On the basis of an analysis of its jurisprudence and recommendations on compliance withinternational human rights norms, standards and remedies, the Working Group concludes that the typical remedy for arbitrarily detained individuals is their immediate release.
Therefore, the Working Group concludes that their deprivation of liberty is not arbitrary;
On the basis of the information provided by the source andnot contested by the Government the Working Group concludes that the circumstances of house arrest imposed on Aung San Suu Kyi amount to deprivation of liberty.
The Working Group concludes that the above-mentioned restrictions are not tantamount to deprivation of liberty.
To some extent that may have been the result of some countries not following the guidelines;at the same time, the Working Group concludes that the text in the guidelines could provide a clearer description of what information is being sought by the questions.
The Working Group concludes that information exchange between the UNECE countries on this topic should be intensified.
Following dialogue with international experts in the field of racism, globalization, culture, development,labour and migration, the Working Group concludes that there is a negative intersectionality between globalization and racism, although it acknowledges that globalization can also contribute to the fight against racism.
The Working Group concludes that the deprivation of liberty of Mr. Chamia was arbitrary being devoid of any legal basis Category I.
In conformity with the above, andin the absence of any information provided by the Government, the Working Group concludes that the detention of Dr. Al-Faleh is arbitrary and falls under Category I of the categories applied by the Working Group, as no legal basis is invoked to justify his detention.
The Working Group concludes that the deprivation of liberty of Mr. Al Abadi is arbitrary being devoid of any legal basis Category I.
In a new Legal Opinion, the Working Group concludes that the transfer of detainees without procedural safeguards is in conflict with international law.
The Working Group concludes that in the field of prevention much remains to be done, especially but not exclusively in countries of EECCA and SEE.
With regard to an overall assessment, the Working Group concludes that, in general, the level of implementation of the Convention measured by the existence of relevant policies is satisfactory.
The Working Group concludes that in the afore-mentioned circumstances, the judgement of Mr. Al Abadi and his condemnation by a military jurisdiction were incompatible with the prescription of article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which the Egypt is a party.
On the basis of the information available to it, the Working Group concludes that Mr. Al Uteibi's detention is arbitrary, falling into category II of the categories applicable to the consideration of the cases submitted to the Working Group. .
The Working Group concludes that Mr. Al Khodr has been deprived of liberty for having peacefully exercised his right to freedom of expression, as guaranteed by article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Bearing in mind the above, the Working Group concludes that measures, including affirmative and positive measures, should be considered during further work on the phenomenon of structural discrimination.
The Working Group concludes that the deprivation of liberty of the abovementioned 11 persons was arbitrary, and that regardless of the fact that they were ultimately released.
On the basis of the elements available to it, the Working Group concludes that Mr. Alkhodr's detention is arbitrary, falling within category II of the categories applicable to the consideration of cases submitted to the Working Group. .
Therefore, the Working Group concludes that the holding of Wang Wanxing in a psychiatric hospital amounts to deprivation of liberty.
On the basis of the elements available to it, the Working Group concludes that Mr. Al Qarni's detention is arbitrary, falling under category II of the categories applicable to the consideration of cases submitted to the Working Group. .
Therefore, the Working Group concludes that Yao Fuxin's exercise of his right to assembly and association cannot be regarded prima facie as not peaceful.
The Working Group concludes with the hope that the current obstacles to the reforms needed will be removed with a view to strengthening the rule of law.
The Working Group concludes that the three elements enunciated above, combined together, are of such gravity that they confer an arbitrary character on the deprivation of liberty of these five persons.
The Working Group concludes that the three elements enunciated above, combined together, are of such gravity that they confer upon the deprivation of liberty of these five persons an arbitrary character.
The Working Group concludes that, if from the examination of the communication it is concluded that the detention is of an arbitrary character, the Lebanese Government bears full responsibility for it.