Jayawickrama covers the case law of the superior courts of eighty countries in North America, Europe, Africa, Asia, the Caribbean and the Pacific, as well as jurisprudence of the UN Human
Trang 2This page intentionally left blank
Trang 3H U M A N R I G H T S L A W
National, Regional and International Jurisprudence
Since the proclamation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, over 140 countries have incorporated human rights standards into their legal systems: the resulting jurisprudence from diverse cultural tradi- tions brings new dimensions to concepts first articulated in 1948 Nihal Jayawickrama draws on all available sources to encapsulate the judicial interpretation of human rights law in one ambitious, comprehensive volume Jayawickrama covers the case law of the superior courts of eighty countries in North America, Europe, Africa, Asia, the Caribbean and the Pacific, as well as jurisprudence of the UN Human Rights monitoring bodies, the European Court of Human Rights, and of the Inter-American system He analyses the judicial application of human rights law to demonstrate empirically the universality of contemporary human rights norms This definitive compendium will be essential for legal practitioners, and government and non-governmental officials,
as well as academics and students of both constitutional law and the international law of human rights law.
n i h a l j a y a w i c k r a m a was the Ariel F Sallows Professor of Human Rights at the University of Saskatchewan He taught both constitutional law and the international law of human rights at the University of Hong Kong, and published on a range of contemporary legal, constitutional and human rights issues An advocate for a Bill of Rights in Hong Kong prior to the transfer of sovereignty in 1997, he was involved in the processes that led to its fruition Executive Director of Transparency International from 1997 to 2000, he is currently a consultant on gover- nance and judicial reform A member of the Sri Lanka Bar, he held the offices of Attorney General and Permanent Secretary to the Ministry of Justice, and served as a Representative to the United Nations General Assembly.
Trang 6
Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo Cambridge University Press
The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge , United Kingdom
First published in print format
isbn-13 978-0-521-78042-1 hardback
isbn-13 978-0-511-06895-9 eBook (EBL)
© Nihal Jayawickrama 2002
2002
Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521780421
This book is in copyright Subject to statutory exception and to the provision of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press.
isbn-10 0-511-06895-6 eBook (EBL)
isbn-10 0-521-78042-X hardback
Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of
s for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this book, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York www.cambridge.org
Trang 7the jungles have the same rights as you, O great King, to livewherever they wish or to roam wherever they will The landbelongs to the people of the country and to all other beings thatinhabit it, while you are only its guardian.
Arahat Mahinda, the son of Emperor Asoka of the Mauryan
dynasty, to King Devanampiyatissa of Lanka, c 250–210 bc,
found on a rock inscription in Polonnaruwa, Sri Lanka.
Trang 9Preface pageix
Table of cases xiii
Table of instruments civ
part i Introduction 1
1 Historical and juridical background 3
2 The international bill of human rights 24
3 The domestic protection of human rights 95
4 The international protection of human rights 130
part ii General principles 157
5 Interpretation 159
6 Non-discrimination 174
7 Limitations 182
8 Derogation 202
part iii The substantive rights 215
9 The right of self-determination 217
10 The right to life 239
11 The right to freedom from torture 296
vii
Trang 10viii contents
12 The right to freedom from slavery 353
13 The right to liberty 369
14 The rights of prisoners 425
15 The right to freedom of movement 436
16 The right to a fair trial 478
17 The rights of accused persons 527
18 The right to recognition as a person 595
19 The right to privacy 597
20 The right to freedom of thought 637
21 The right to freedom of expression 663
22 The right to freedom of assembly 721
23 The right to freedom of association 735
24 The right to family life 761
25 The rights of the child 780
26 The right to participate in public life 789
27 The right to equality 816
28 The rights of minorities 842
29 The rights relating to work 852
30 The rights relating to social security 864
31 The right to an adequate standard of living 869
32 The right to health 881
33 The right to education 890
34 The right to cultural life 904
35 The right to property 908
Trang 11From 1978, I was associated with Professor Paul Sieghart, then chairman
of JUSTICE, the United Kingdom section of the International mission of Jurists, and Professor James Fawcett, then president of theEuropean Commission of Human Rights, in a research project on theinternational law of human rights My research on the jurisprudence ofthe Strasbourg institutions and of national courts was incorporated in
Com-Paul Sieghart’s pioneering work, The International Law of Human Rights
which was published in 1983 The cut-off date for the law examined inthat book was 31 December 1981
In the next two decades, the international human rights regime thened considerably Over 150 countries, spread over every continent,incorporated contemporary human rights standards into their legal sys-tems Over 100 countries ratified the Optional Protocol to the Interna-tional Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, thereby enabling theirinhabitants to access the Human Rights Committee Meanwhile, nearlyall the countries of South and Central America, Africa and Europe sub-scribed to regional human rights instruments with their own monitoring
streng-or enfstreng-orcement mechanisms The resulting jurisprudence, rich in tent and varied in flavour, from diverse cultural traditions, has added anew dimension to the concepts first articulated in the Universal Declara-tion of Human Rights This book seeks to incorporate that jurisprudenceand, in that sense, complement the late Paul Sieghart’s invaluable work
con-I have not set out to produce a scholarly work on human rights or oninternational law There are already several analyses of the theoreticalfoundations and the politics of human rights, commentaries on thedifferent human rights instruments, academic studies of selected rights,and surveys of selected case law of the Strasbourg institutions and of theHuman Rights Committee What is lacking is a volume that assembles allthe available jurisprudence on human rights from international, regional
ix
Trang 12(a) the travaux pr´eparatoires, particularly in respect of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;
(b) the texts of international instruments dealing with specific rightsand other standard setting resolutions of the United Nations GeneralAssembly, specialized agencies and subsidiary institutions;
(c) the general comments of the Human Rights Committee and theCommittee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the con-clusions of the Committee of Experts under the European SocialCharter;
(d) the judgments and advisory opinions of the International Court ofJustice and its predecessor, the Permanent Court of InternationalJustice;
(e) the decisions of the Human Rights Committee on individual munications received under the Optional Protocol, and of theCommittee against Torture;
com-(f ) the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights and the ports and decisions of the European Commission of Human Rights;(g) the decisions and advisory opinions of the Inter-American Court ofHuman Rights and the reports of the Inter-American Commission
re-of Human Rights;
(h) the judgments of superior courts in national jurisdictions ing and applying domestic Bills of Rights, wherever the specific rightsand freedoms have been formulated in terms identical or similar tothose enunciated in the two international human rights convenants;and
interpret-(i) the works of jurists
The depth of discussion of a particular right is dependent on the ability of case law Accordingly, the chapters on economic, social andcultural rights are necessarily brief, while some on civil and politicalrights may appear inordinately long Since I have been able to workonly in the English language, references to national jurisprudence fromthe European continent are often based on published summaries The
Trang 13avail-cut-off date for the law incorporated in this book is, to the extent ticable, 31 December 2001.
prac-Any work of this kind involves considerable research Much of theearly work was done in the libraries of the United Nations in New Yorkand Geneva, and of the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies in London
I am grateful to the former United Nations Centre for Human Rights inGeneva, the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States
in Washington DC, and the Secretariat of the Council of Europe inStrasbourg for sending me regularly a wealth of information contained
in their publications, documents and reports Many friends, including
my former colleagues in Hong Kong, have either sent me, or directed
me to, material which I was unaware of or had overlooked, or provided
me access to their personal collections
Writing a book of this nature is difficult to combine with regular ing at a university, as I soon discovered after I commenced preliminarywork on it while teaching constitutional, administrative and humanrights law at the University of Hong Kong I am most grateful, therefore,for the opportunity afforded me by the University of Saskatchewan in1992–3, to spend an academic year in Saskatoon, in the exhilarating cli-mate of the Canadian prairies It was during that year, when I had theprivilege of occupying the Ariel F Sallows Chair of Human Rights, that
teach-I began writing this book teach-I could not have found a more conducive orstimulating environment, made even more agreeable by the warmth andkindness with which Dean Peter MacKinnon, QC, and his colleagues re-ceived my family and me After leaving both Hong Kong and academia in
1997, progress on this book was interrupted for a while as I commutedbetween London and Berlin (and a few other places as well) learningand exploring the new, but not entirely unrelated, area of corruption inpublic life and, more especially, in the judiciary
This book would not, of course, have assumed the shape and form
in which it appears today but for the help and co-operation which wasalways forthcoming from Professor James Crawford, Whewell Profes-sor of International Law at the University of Cambridge, Ms FinolaO’Sullivan, Commissioning Editor (Law), and Dr Jennie Rubio, LawDevelopment Editor, at Cambridge University Press I am grateful fortheir recognition of the need for a definitive text on this subject, andtheir belief in my capacity to produce and deliver within the time con-straints that regulate most things in life An effort spread over a decade
Trang 14xii preface
would not have been possible without the continuing tolerance and derstanding of my family Indeed, it was their profound interest andencouragement that enabled this work to reach fruition My deepestdebt, therefore, is owed to my wife, Sarojini, and to our two daughters,Nishana and Sharanya, all of whom, I am sure, looked forward on eachnew year’s day to life finally returning to normal in our home, wherever
un-it might have been located
The language of the chapters on the substantive rights that follow israrely mine The real authors are the lawyers and judges, the men andwomen of many cultures who, individually and collectively, enhancedthe value of human life and extended the frontiers of human dignity
by their courageous, imaginative and innovative approach to the pretation and application of international and regional human rightsinstruments and national constitutions I have attempted to assemble in
inter-a single volume inter-as much of the minter-ateriinter-al inter-as I hinter-ave been inter-able to ginter-ather
in the hope that their endeavours will help and inspire others not only
to follow but even to improve upon their achievements Thereby, theevolving body of international human rights law will, in fact, becomethe universally accepted common standard by which the conduct of gov-ernments, public officials, private bodies, and individuals is measured If
I have expressed a preference for a particular view, criticized a decision,
or projected a dissent, I have done so because of my own perception that
in the protection of human rights, it is not possible to compromise; therecan be no half-way houses, no wayside halting places Human rights arenot only fundamental; they are also inherent and inalienable
Trang 15Permanent Court of International Justice
Chorzow Factory Case, PCIJ Reports 1928, Series A,
Minority Schools in Albania Case, PCIJ Reports 1935,
Mosul Boundary Case, PCIJ Reports 1925, Series B, No.12, 32 6Polish Nationals in Danzig, PCIJ Reports 1931, Series A/B,
Steiner and Gross v The Polish State, Upper Silesian Arbitral
Tribunal, Cases Nos.188 and 287, Annual Digest 1927–8 19
International Court of Justice
Aegean Sea Continental Shelf Case, ICJ Reports 1978, 39 5Applicability of Article VI, Section 22 of the Convention on
the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations,
Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports 1989 25, 41, 765Application of the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and
Herzogovina v Yugoslavia), ICJ Reports 1993 23, 85Application for Review of Judgment No.333 of the United
Nations Administrative Tribunal, ICJ Reports 1987 41
xiii
Trang 16xiv table of cases
Asylum Case (Colombia v Peru), ICJ Reports 1950, 266 6Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company Limited Case
(Belgium v Spain), ICJ Reports 1970 6, 7, 38, 356Case Concerning Maritime Delimitation and Territorial
Questions between Qatar and Bahrain (Qatar v Bahrain)
(Jurisdiction – First Phase), ICJ Reports 1994 5Case concerning Maritime Delimitation in the Area between
Greenland and Jan Mayen (Denmark v Norway), ICJ
Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Teheran Case (USA v Iran),
Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of
South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa)
Notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970),
ICJ Reports 1971 23, 31, 33, 40, 161, 227, 235Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons,
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua
North Sea Continental Shelf Case (Federal Republic of
Nottebohm Case (second phase), ICJ Reports 1955, 23 40Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide Case, ICJ Reports 1951 43South West Africa Case (second phase), ICJ Reports 1966 40Western Sahara Case, ICJ Reports 1975 222, 227
International Arbitral Tribunals
Alabama Claims Arbitration (1872) Moore 1 Int Arb 495 97
Human Rights Committee
A v Australia, Communication No.560/1993, HRC 1997
Report, Annex VI.L 377, 380, 381, 417, 420, 423
A Group of Associations for the Defence of the Rights of the
Disabled and Handicapped Persons in Italy v Italy,
Communication No.163/1984, HRC 1984 Report, Annex XV 53
Trang 17AB v Italy, Communication No.413/1990, HRC 1991 Report,
AB Dr v Italy, Communication No.565/1993, HRC 1994
Ackla v Togo, Communication No.505/1992, HRC 1996
Acosta v Uruguay, Communication No.110/1981, HRC 1984
AD v Canada, Communication No.78/1980, HRC 1984
Adams v Jamaica, Communication No.607/1994,
Adimayo Aduayom v Togo, Communication
Nos.422–4/1990, HRC 1996 Report, Annex VIII.C 814
Allan Henry v Trinidad and Tobago, Communication
No.752/1997, HRC 1999 Report, Annex IX.DD 488
Altesor v Uruguay, Communication No.10/1977, HRC 1982
AP v Italy, Communication No.204/1986, HRC 1988 Report,
ARS v Canada, Communication No.91/1981, 28 October 1981 591
Aumeeruddy-Cziffra v Mauritius, Communication
No.35/1978, HRC 1981 Report, Annex XIII 621, 768
Avellanal v Peru, Communication No.202/1986, HRC 1989
B v Netherlands, Communication No.273/1989, HRC 1989
Baboeram-Adhin v Suriname, Communication
Bahamonde v Equatorial Guinea, Communication
Bailey v Jamaica, Communication No.334/1988, 31 March 1993 431
Bailey v Jamaica, Communication No.709/1996, HRC 1999
Ballantyne, Davidson and McIntyre v Canada,
Communication Nos.359/1989 and 385/1989, 31 March 1993 184
Barbato v Uruguay, Communication No.84/1981, HRC 1983
Trang 18xvi table of cases
Barrett and Sutcliffe v Jamaica, Communication
Nos.270/1988 and 271/1988, HRC 1992 Report, Annex IX.F 324
Barroso v Panama, Communication No.473/1991, HRC 1995
Barzhig v France, Communication No.327/1988, HRC 1991
Bazzano v Uruguay, Communication No.5/1977, HRC 1979
Bequio v Uruguay, Communication No.88/1981, HRC 1983
Berry v Jamaica, Communication No.330/1988, HRC 1994
Bhinder v Canada, Communication No.208/1986, HRC 1990
Birindwa and Tshisekedi v Zaire, Communication Nos.241
and 242/1987, HRC 1990 Report, Annex IX.I 444
Bleier v Uruguay, Communication No.30/1978, HRC 1982
Blom v Sweden, Communication No.191/1985, HRC 1988
Bolanos v Ecuador, Communication No.238/1987, HRC
Bouton v Uruguay, Communication No.37/1978, HRC 1981
Brinkhof v Netherlands, Communication No.402/1990,
Broeks v Netherlands, Communication No.172/1984, HRC
Brown v Jamaica, Communication No.775/1997, HRC 1999
Burgos v Uruguay, Communication No.R 21/52/1979, HRC
Burrell v Jamaica, Communication No.546/1993, HRC 1996
Bwalya v Zambia, Communication No.314/1988, 14 July 1993 376
Cabreira v Uruguay, Communication No.105/1981, HRC
Cadoret v France, Communication No.221/1987, HRC 1991
Trang 19Caldas v Uruguay, Communication No.43/1979, HRC 1983
Camargo v Colombia, Communication No.45/1979, HRC
Campbell (Glenford) v Jamaica, Communication
No.248/1987, HRC 1992 Report, Annex IX.D 289, 566, 576
Campbell (John) v Jamaica, Communication No.307/1988,
Canepa v Canada, Communication No.558/1993, HRC 1997
Carballal v Uruguay, Communication No.33/1978, HRC
Cariboni v Uruguay, Communication No.159/1983, HRC
Casariego v Uruguay, Communication No.56/1979, HRC
Celepli v Sweden, Communication No.456/1991, HRC 1994
Chaplin v Jamaica, Communication No.596/94, HRC 1995
CLD v France, Communication No.228/1987, HRC 1988
Coeriel and Aurik v Netherlands, Communication
No.453/1991, HRC 1995 Report, Annex X.D 604, 616
Collins v Jamaica, Communication No.240/1987, HRC 1992
Collins v Jamaica, Communication No.356/1989, 25 March 1993 557
Compass v Jamaica, Communication No.375/1989,
Conteris v Uruguay, Communication No.139/1983, HRC
Cox v Canada, Communication No.539/1993, HRC 1995
Daley v Jamaica, Communication No.750/1997, HRC 1998
Danning v Netherlands, Communication No.180/1984, HRC
Darwinia Rosa Monaco de Gallicchio v Argentina,
Communication No.400/1990, HRC 1995 Report, Annex X.B 596
Trang 20xviii table of cases
De Gallicchio v Argentina, Communication No.400/1990,
3 April 1995, HRC 1995 Report, Annex X.B 787
De Groot v Netherlands, Communication No.578/1994,
De Lopez v Uruguay, Communication No.52/1979, HRC
De Voituret v Uruguay, Communication No.109/1981, HRC
Debreczeny v Netherlands, Communication No.500/1992,
Deidrick v Jamaica, Communication No.619/1995, HRC
Delia Saldias de Lopez v Uruguay, Communication
Domukovsky et al v Georgia, Communication Nos.623–4,
626–7/1995, HRC 1998 Report, Annex XI.M 302, 583
Douglas v Jamaica, Communication No.352/1989,
Drbal v Czech Republic, Communication No.498/1992,
22 July 1994, HRC 1994 Report, Annex X.N 787
EB v Jamaica, Communication No.303/1988, HRC 1991
EHP v Canada, Communication No.67/1980, 2 Selected
EP v Colombia, Communication No.318/1988, HRC 1990
Espinoza de Polay v Peru, Communication No.577/1994,
Estrella v Uruguay, Communication No.74/1980, HRC 1983
EW et al v Netherlands, Communication No.429/1990,
Faurisson v France, Communication No.550/1993, HRC
Fei v Colombia, Communication No.514/1992,
HRC 1995 Report, Annex X.J 502, 503, 508, 778
Fillastre v Bolivia, Communication No.336/1988,
Trang 21Finn v Jamaica, Communication No.617/1995, HRC 1998
Foin v France, Communication No.666/1995, HRC 2000
Francis (Clement) v Jamaica, Communication No.606/1994,
Francis (Victor) v Jamaica, Communication
Francis Hopu and Tepoaitu Bessert v France,
Communication No.549/1993, HRC 1997 Report,
Gallimore v Jamaica, Communication No.680/1996, HRC
Gauthier v Canada, Communication No.633/1995, HRC
Gilboa v Uruguay, Communication No.147/1983, HRC 1986
Giry v Dominican Republic, Communication No.193/1985,
Gomez v Spain, Communication No.701/1966, HRC 2000
Gordon v Jamaica, Communication No.237/1987,
Graham and Morrison v Jamaica, Communication
No.461/1991 HRC 1996 Report, Annex VIII.G 289, 324
Grand Chief Donald Marshall v Canada, Communication
No.205/1986, HRC 1991 Report, Annex IX.A 806
Grant v Jamaica, Communication No.353/1988, HRC
Gridin v Russian Federation, Communication No.770/1997,
Griffin v Spain, Communication No.493/1992, HRC 1995
Guesdon v France, Communication No.219/1986, HRC 1990
Gueye v France, Communication No.196/1985, HRC 1989
Hammel v Madagascar, Communication No.155/1983,
Trang 22xx table of cases
Hartikainen v Finland, Communication No.40/1978, HRC
Harward v Norway, Communication No.451/1991, HRC
Hendriks v Netherlands, Communication No.210/1985,
Henry v Jamaica, Communication No.230/1987, HRC 1992
Henry and Douglas v Jamaica, Communication
No.571/1994, HRC 1996 Report, Annex VIII.U 557
Hermoza v Peru, Communication No.203/1986, HRC 1989
Hertzberg v Finland, Communication No.61/1979, HRC
Hill v Spain, Communication No.526/1993, HRC 1997
Hylton v Jamaica, Communication No.407/1990, HRC 1994
Izquierdo v Uruguay, Communication No.73/1980, HRC
Jaona v Madagascar, Communication No.132/1982, HRC
Jarvinen v Finland, Communication No.295/1988, HRC
JB v Canada, Communication No.118/1982, HRC 1986
Jijon v Ecuador, Communication No.277/1988, HRC 1992
JL v Australia, Communication No.491/1992, HRC 1992
Johnson v Jamaica, Communication No.588/1994, HRC 1996
JRT and WG Party v Canada, Communication No.104/1981,
Kalenga v Zambia, Communication No.326/1988,
Kall v Poland, Communication No.552/1993, HRC 1997
Trang 23Kanana v Zaire, Communication No.366/1989, HRC 1994
Karttunen v Finland, Communication No.387/1989, 23
Kelly v Jamaica, Communication No.253/1987, HRC 1991
Report, Annex XI.D 289, 290, 551, 553, 557, 568, 576, 582
Kelly v Jamaica, Communication No.537/1993, HRC 1996
Keun-Tae Kim v Republic of Korea, Communication
No.574/1994, HRC 1999 Report, Annex XI.A 714
Kindler v Canada, Communication No.470/1991,
Kitok v Sweden, Communication No.197/1985, HRC 1988
Kivenmaa v Finland, Communication No.412/1990,
Kone v Senegal, Communication No.386/1989, HRC 1995
Kulomin v Hungary, Communication No.521/1992,
LA v Uruguay, Communication No.128/1982, HRC 1983
Lansman v Finland (No.1), Communication No.511/1992,
Lansman v Finland (No.2), Communication No.671/1995,
Laptsevich v Belarus, Communication No.780/1997,
Laureano v Peru, Communication No.540/1993, HRC 1996
LaVende v Trinidad and Tobago, Communication
No.554/1993, HRC 1998 Report, Annex XI.B 324, 583
Leslie v Jamaica, Communication No.564/1993, HRC 1998
Lewis v Jamaica, Communication No.527/1993, HRC 1996
LG v Mauritius, Communication No.354/1989, HRC 1991
Trang 24xxii table of cases
Lichtensztejn v Uruguay, Communication No.77/1980, HRC
Lindgren et al v Sweden, Communication Nos.298–9/1988,
Linton v Jamaica, Communication No.255/1987,
Lippmann v France, Communication No.472/1991, HRC
Little v Jamaica, Communication No.283/1988, HRC 1992
Lluberas v Uruguay, Communication No.123/1982, HRC
Lopez v Uruguay, Communication No.52/1979, HRC 1981
Lovelace v Canada, Communication No.24/1977, HRC 1981
LTK v Finland, Communication No.185/1984, HRC 1985
Lubuto v Zambia, Communication No.390/1990, HRC 1996
Lumley v Jamaica, Communication No.662/1995, HRC 1999
Machado v Uruguay, Communication No.83/1981, HRC
MacIsaac v Canada, Communication No.55/1979, HRC 1983
Maille v France, Communication No.689/1996, HRC 2000
Marais v Madagascar, Communication No.49/1979, HRC
Maroufidou v Sweden, Communication No.58/1979, HRC
Martins v Uruguay, Communication No.57/1979, HRC 1982
Massera v Uruguay, Communication No.R.1/5, HRC 1979
Massiotti v Uruguay, Communication No.R.6/25/1978, HRC
Trang 25Matthews v Trinidad and Tobago, Communication
No.569/1993, HRC 1998 Report, Annex XI.E 431
Mbenge v Zaire, Communication No.16/1977, HRC 1983
McCordie Morrison v Jamaica, Communication
No.663/1995, HRC 1999 Report, Annex XI.Q 569
McLawrence v Jamaica, Communication No.702/1996, HRC
McLeod v Jamaica, Communication No.734/1997, HRC 1998
McTaggart v Jamaica, Communication No.749/1997,
MF v Jamaica, Communication No.233/1987, HRC 1992
Miango v Zaire, Communication No.194/1985, HRC 1988
Miha v Equatorial Guinea, Communication No.414/1990,
Mojica v Dominican Republic, Communication
No.449/1991, HRC 1994 Report, Annex IX.W 282, 376
Montejo v Colombia, Communication No.64/1979, HRC
Montero v Uruguay, Communication No.106/1981, HRC
Morael v France, Communication No.207/1986, HRC 1989
Motta v Uruguay, Communication No.11/1977, HRC 1980
Mpaka-Nsusu v Zaire, Communication No.157/1983, HRC
Mpandanjila v Zaire, Communication No.138/1983, HRC
Muhonen v Finland, Communication No.89/1981, HRC
Mukong v Cameroon, Communication No.458/1991,
Muteba v Zaire, Communication No.124/1982, HRC 1984
Trang 26xxiv table of cases
Ng v Canada, Communication No.469/1991, HRC 1994
Nieto v Uruguay, Communication No.92/1981, HRC 1983
Nunez v Uruguay, Communication No.108/1981, HRC 1983
Nydia Erika Bautista de Arellana v Colombia,
Communication No.563/1993, HRC 1996 Report,
Ominayak v Canada, Communication No.167/1984, HRC
Paez v Colombia, Communication No.195/1985, HRC 1990
Parkanyi v Hungary, Communication No.410/1990, HRC
Pauger v Austria,, Communication No.415/1990, HRC 1992
Peart and Peart v Jamaica, Communication Nos.464/1991
and 482/1991, HRC 1995 Report, Annex X.E 288, 290, 308, 572
Penarrieta v Bolivia, Communication No.176/1984, HRC
Pereira v Panama, Communication No.436/1990, HRC 1994
Perera v Australia, Communication No.536/1993, HRC 1995
Perkins v Jamaica, Communication No.733/1997, 30 July 1998 431
Philbert v Zaire, Communication No.90/1981, HRC 1983
Pietraroia v Uruguay, Communication No.R 10/44, HRC
Pinkney v Canada, Communication No.R.7/27/1978, HRC
Pinto v Trinidad and Tobago, Communication No.232/1987,
Pinto (Daniel) v Trinidad and Tobago, Communication
No.512/1992, HRC 1996 Report, Annex VIII.J 432
Polay Campos v Peru, Communication No.577/1994, HRC
Trang 27Pons v Spain, Communication No.454/1991, HRC 1996
Portorreal v Dominican Republic, Communication
No.188/1984, HRC 1988 Report, Annex VII.D 301–302
Pratt and Morgan v Jamaica, Communication Nos.210/1986,
225/1987, HRC 1989 Report, Annex X.F 324, 557, 566, 582
Price v Jamaica, Communication No.572/1994, 1996, HRC
Quinteros v Uruguay, Communication No.107/1981, HRC
Ramirez v Uruguay, Communication No.4/1977, HRC 1980
Rehoboth Baster Community v Namibia, Communication
No.760/1997, HRC 2000 Report, Annex IX.M 792, 836, 847
Reid v Jamaica, Communication No.250/1987, HRC 1990
Reynolds v Jamaica, Communication No.587/1994, HRC
Richards v Jamaica, Communication No.535/1993,
Robinson v Jamaica, Communication No.223/1987, HRC
Romero v Uruguay, Communication No.85/1981, HRC 1984
RL v Canada, Communication No.358/1989, HRC 1992
RM v Jamaica, Communication No.315/1988, HRC 1991
Rodriguez v Uruguay, Communication No.322/1988, HRC
Santacana v Spain, Communication No.417/1990,
Sawyers v Jamaica, Communication No.226/1987, HRC 1991
Schweizer v Uruguay, Communication No.66/1980, HRC
Seerattan v Trinidad and Tobago, Communication
No.434/1990, HRC 1996 Report, Annex VIII.D 557
Trang 28xxvi table of cases
Sendic v Uruguay, Communication No.R.14/63, 28 October
Setelich v Uruguay Communication No.63/1979, HRC 1982
Shalto v Trinidad and Tobago,Communication No.447/1991,
Shaw v Jamaica, Communication No.704/1996, HRC 1998
Silva v Uruguay, Communication No.34/1978, HRC 1981
Simonds v Jamaica, Communication No.338/1988,
Simmonds, Gentles and Kerr v Jamaica, Communication
No.352/1989, HRC 1994 Report, Annex IX.G 553, 567
Simms v Jamaica Communication No.541/1993, HRC 1995
Simunek v The Czech Republic, Communication
No.516/1992, HRC 1995 Report, Annex X.K 824, 840, 910
Singer v Canada, Communication No.455/1991, HRC 1994
Smith v Jamaica, Communication No.282/1988,
Smith and Stewart v Jamaica, Communication No.668/1995,
Solorzano v Venezuela, Communication No.156/1983, HRC
Soogrim v Trinidad and Tobago, Communication
Sprenger v Netherlands, Communication No.395/1990,
Stalla Costa v Uruguay, Communication No.198/1985, HRC
Steadman v Jamaica, Communication No.528/1993, HRC
Stephens (Lennon) v Jamaica, Communication No.373/1989,
Stewart v Canada, Communication No.538/1993,
Trang 29T v Australia, Communication No.706/1996, HRC 1998
Tae Hoon Park v Republic of Korea, Communication
No.628/1995, HRC 1999 Report, Annex XI.K 714
Taylor v Jamaica, Communication No.707/1996, HRC 1997
Taylor and the Western Guard Party v Canada,
Communication No.104/1981, HRC 1983 Report,
Thomas (Alrick) v Jamaica, Communication No.272/1988,
Thomas (Maurice) v Jamaica, Communication No.321/1988,
Toonen v Australia, Communication No.488/1992, HRC
1994 Report, Annex IX.EE 198, 199, 604, 612, 832
Torres v Finland, Communication No.291/1988,
Tshshimbi v Zaire, Communication No.542/1993, HRC 1996
Valenzuela v Peru, Communication No.309/1988,
Van Alphen v Netherlands, Communication No.305/1988,
Van Meurs v Netherlands, Communication No.215/1986,
Venier and Nicholas v France, Communication
Nos.690–1/1996, HRC 2000 Report, Annex IX.G 823
Vidal Martins v Uruguay Human Rights Committee,
Communication No.57/1979, Selected Decisions under the
Optional Protocol (Second to Sixteenth Sessions), 122 453
Voituret v Uruguay, Communication No.109/1981, HRC
Vuolanne v Finland, Communication No.265/1987, HRC
Waldman v Canada, Communication No.694/1996,
HRC 2000 Report, Annex IX.H 661, 837, 850, 861
Waksman v Uruguay, Communication No.31/1978, HRC
Trang 30xxviii table of cases
Walker v Jamaica, Communication No.639/1995, HRC 1997
Weinberger v Uruguay Communication No.28/1978, HRC
Weismann de Lanza v Uruguay, Communication No.8/1977,
Whyte v Jamaica, Communication No.732/1997,
Williams v Jamaica, Communication No.609/1995, HRC
Wolf v Panama, Communication No.289/1988, HRC 1992
Wright v Jamaica, Communication No.349/1989, HRC 1992
Wright v Madagscar, Communication No.115/1982, HRC
Wright and Harvey v Jamaica, Communication No.459/1991,
HRC 1996 Report, Annex VIII.F 56, 289, 567, 569
WW v Jamaica, Communication No.254/1987, HRC 1991
Yasseen and Thomas v Guyana, Communication
No.676/1996, HRC 1998, Report, Annex XI.R 431, 557, 567
YL v Canada, Communication No.112/1981, HRC 1986
Young v Jamaica, Communication No.615/1995, HRC 1998
Zouhair Ben Said v Norway, Communication No.767/1997,
Zwaan-de Vries v Netherlands, Communication
No.182/1984, HRC 1987 Report, Annex VIII.D 824, 833
Committee against Torture
Khan v Canada, Communication No.15/1994,
Mutombo v Switzerland, Communication No.13/1993,
Trang 31Tala v Sweden, Communication No.43/1996,
International Labour Organization
Hong Kong Union of Post Office Employees v United
Kingdom/Hong Kong, 277thReport of the Committee on
International Confederation of Free Trade Unions v China,
Case No.1500, 270thReport of the Committee on Freedom
Regional
European Court of Human Rights
Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali v United Kingdom (1985)
Air Canada v United Kingdom (1995) 20 EHRR 150 498, 915
Albert and Le Compte v Belgium (1983) 5 EHRR 533 313, 499, 746
Allenet de Ribemont v France (1995) 20 EHRR 557 550, 682
Allgemeine Gold-Und Silberscheideanstalt v United
Trang 32xxx table of cases
Andersson v Sweden (1992) 14 EHRR 615 623, 624
Andronicou and Constantinou v Cyprus (1997)
AP, MP and TP v Switzerland (1997) 26 EHRR 541 495, 550
Ashingdane v United Kingdom (1985) 7 EHRR 528 393, 482
Autronic AG v Switzerland (1990) 12 EHRR 485 187, 670, 683
Averill v United Kingdom (2000) 31 EHRR 839 581
Aydin v Turkey (1997) 25 EHRR 251 299, 306, 316
Barbera, Messegue and Jabardo v Spain (1988)
Barthold v Germany (1985) 7 EHRR 383 191, 681, 694
Baskaya and Okcuogh v Turkey (1999) 31 EHRR 292 691
Beaumartin v France (1994) 19 EHRR 485 499, 516
Belgian Linguistic Case (No.2) (1968) 1 EHRR 252 177, 895, 896
Benham v United Kingdom (1996) 22 EHRR 293 380, 495, 568
Berrehab v Netherlands (1988) 11 EHRR 332 623, 766
Bladet Tromso and Stensaas v Norway (1999) 29 EHRR 215 699
Bolkenbockhoff v Germany (1987) 10 EHRR 163 549
Boyle v United Kingdom (1994) 19 EHRR 179 621
Boyle and Rice v United Kingdom (1988) 10 EHRR 425 634
Trang 33Brandstetter v Austria (1991) 15 EHRR 378 503
British-American Tobacco Co Ltd v Netherlands 20 November
Brogan v United Kingdom (1988) 11 EHRR 117 390, 407, 416
Bryan v United Kingdom (1995) 21 EHRR 342 499, 515
Burghartz v Switzerland (1994) 18 EHRR 101 616
Buscarini v San Marino (1999) 30 EHRR 208 645Case Relating to Certain Aspects of the Laws on the Use of
Languages in Education in Belgium (Belgian Linguistic
Campbell v United Kingdom (1992) 15 EHRR 137 634
Campbell and Cosans v United Kingdom (1982) 4 EHRR 293
311, 334, 348, 900, 901
Campbell and Fell v United Kingdom (1984) 7 EHRR 165 495, 512,
524, 525, 565
Canea Catholic Church v Greece (1997) 27 EHRR 521 487
Casado Coca v Spain (1994) 18 EHRR 1 677, 681
Castells v Spain (1992) 14 EHRR 445 187, 672, 691, 695
Castillo Algar v Spain (1998) 30 EHRR 827 521
Chahal v United Kingdom (1996) 23 EHRR 413 298, 307, 327,
329, 395, 416, 422
Chappell v United Kingdom (1989) 12 EHRR 1 190, 628
Chassagnou v France (1999) 29 EHRR 615 186, 188, 189, 742,
745, 746, 756, 913
Condron v United Kingdom (2000) 31 EHRR 1 581
Cossey v United Kingdom (1990) 13 EHRR 622 618, 772
Coyne v United Kingdom 24 September 1997 522
Costello-Roberts v United Kingdom (1993) 19 EHRR 12 47, 349
CR v United Kingdom (1995) 21 EHRR 363 533, 588
Trang 34xxxii table of cases
De Haan v Netherlands (1997) 26 EHRR 417 522
De Haes and Gijsels v Belgium (1997) 25 EHRR 1 503
De Jong, Baljet and Van den Brink v Netherlands (1984)
De Moor v Belgium 23 June 1994 499, 508, 525
De Wilde, Ooms and Versyp v Netherlands (No.1) (1971)
De Weer v Belgium (1980) 2 EHRR 439 489, 497, 501
Diennet v France (1995) 21 EHRR 554 499, 508, 513
Dombo Beheer BV v Netherlands (1993) 18 EHRR 213 507
Doorson v Netherlands (1996) 22 EHRR 330 571
Dudgeon v United Kingdom (1981) 4 EHRR 149 187, 198, 612
Duinhof and Duijf v Netherlands (1984) 13 EHRR 478 409
Eckle v Germany (1982) 5 EHRR 1 497, 557, 559
Edwards v United Kingdom (1992) 15 EHRR 417 505
Engel et al v Netherlands (1976) 1 EHRR 647 375, 381, 383, 495, 512
Eriksen v Norway (1997) 29 EHRR 328 386, 387, 391
Eriksson v Sweden (1989) 12 EHRR 183 624, 775
Erkner and Hofauer v Austria (1987) 9 EHRR 464 499, 920
Ezelin v France (1991) 14 EHRR 362 189, 728, 730
Fayed v United Kingdom (1994) 18 EHRR 393 482, 636
Feldbrugge v Netherlands (1986) 8 EHRR 425 498
Trang 35Findlay v United Kingdom (1997) 24 EHRR 221 522
Fox, Campbell and Hartley v United Kingdom (1990)
Foxley v United Kingdom (2000) 31 EHRR 637 632
Fressoz and Roire v France (1999) 21 EHRR 28;
Gaskin v United Kingdom (1989) 12 EHRR 36 609, 682
Gillow v United Kingdom (1986) 11 EHRR 335 626
Golder v United Kingdom (1975) 1 EHRR 524 482, 499, 634
Goodwin v United Kingdom (1996) 22 EHRR 123 705
Gradinger v Austria 23 October 1995 490, 495
Gregory v United Kingdom (1997) 25 EHRR 577 521, 524
Grigoriades v Greece (1997) 27 EHRR 464 671, 689, 701, 709
Groppera Radio AG v Switzerland (1990)
Guerra v Italy (1998) 26 EHRR 357 601, 628, 682
Gustafsson v Sweden (1996) 22 EHRR 409 741, 752, 756
Guzzardi v Italy (1980) 3 EHRR 333 375, 381, 383, 392
Hadjianastassiou v Greece (1992) 16 EHRR 219 698, 715
Hakansson and Sturesson v Sweden (1990) 13 EHRR 1 914
Halford v United Kingdom (1977) 24 EHRR 523 630
Trang 36xxxiv table of cases
Handyside v United Kingdom (1976) 1 EHRR 737 187, 197, 689, 699
Hashman and Harrup v United Kingdom (1999) 30 EHRR 241 675
Herczegfalvy v Austria (1992) 15 EHRR 437 684
Hussain v United Kingdom (1996) 22 EHRR 1 419, 421
Iatridis v Greece (1999) 30 EHRR 97 913, 918
Imbrioscia v Switzerland (1993) 17 EHRR 441 555, 559, 568
Immobiliare Saffi v Italy (1999) 30 EHRR 756 918
Ireland v United Kingdom (1978) 2 EHRR 25 101, 205, 302, 303,
306, 307, 308, 310, 311, 409
James v United Kingdom (1986) 8 EHRR 123 916, 917, 919
Jasper v United Kingdom (2000) 30 EHRR 441 506
Johnson v United Kingdom (1997) 27 EHRR 296 393, 394
Johnston v Ireland (1986) 9 EHRR 203 620, 622, 766, 775, 777
Kampanis v Greece (1995) 21 EHRR 43 421, 505
Karlheinz Schmidt v Germany 18 July 1994 368
Kemmache v France (1991) 14 EHRR 520 412, 414
K-F v Germany (1997) 26 EHRR 390 386, 389, 390
Kjeldsen, Busk, Madsen and Pedersen v Denmark (1976)
Trang 37Klass v Germany (1978) 2 EHRR 214 194, 629, 631
Koendjbiharie v Netherlands (1990) 13 EHRR 820 422
Kokkinakis v Greece (1993) 17 EHRR 397 587, 655
K ¨onig v Germany (1978)2 EHRR 170 499, 557, 560
Kopp v Switzerland (1998) 27 EHRR 91 629, 630
Kostovski v Netherlands (1989) 12 EHRR 434 570
Kroon v Netherlands (1994) 19 EHRR 263 766, 767
Kruslin v France (1990) 12 EHRR 547 191, 630
Lamguindaz v United Kingdom 28 June 1993 623
Langborger v Sweden (1989) 12 EHRR 416 515, 523
Laskey, Jaggard and Brown v United Kingdom (1997)
Letellier v France (1991) 14 EHRR 83 413, 414
Lawless v Ireland (No.3) (1961) 1 EHRR 15 161, 205, 208,
212, 214, 389
LCB v United Kingdom (1998) 27 EHRR 212 262, 271
Le Compte, Van Leuven and De Meyere v Belgium (1981)
Lehideux and Isorni v France (1998) 30 EHRR 665 674, 709
Lingens and Leitgens v Austria (1981) 4 EHRR 373 540
Lingens v Austria (1986) 8 EHRR 103 692, 695, 711
Lithgow v United Kingdom (1986) 8 EHRR 329 482, 498
Lobo Machado v Portugal (1997) 23 EHRR 79 503
Loizidou v Turkey, (1995) 20 EHRR 99; 18 (1996)
Loukanov v Bulgaria (1997) 24 EHRR 121 386, 387
Luberti v Italy (1984) 6 EHRR 440 393, 394, 418
Trang 38xxxvi table of cases
Luedicke, Belkacem and Koc v Germany (1978) 2 EHRR 149 574
Malone v United Kingdom (1984) 7 EHRR 14 190, 630
Manoussakis v Greece (1996) 23 EHRR 387 645, 659
Mantovanelli v France (1997) 24 EHRR 370 503
Marckx v Belgium (1979) 2 EHRR 330 47, 602, 621,
622, 625, 741, 775, 910
Markt Intern Verlag GmbH v Germany (1989)
Mathieu-Mohin and Clerfayt v Belgium (1987) 10 EHRR 1 808, 812
Matos E Silva, Lda v Portugal (1996) 24 EHRR 573
492, 911, 913, 917
McCallum v United Kingdom (1990) 13 EHRR 596 633
McCann v United Kingdom (1995) 21 EHRR 97 263, 277, 278
McGinley v United Kingdom (1998) 27 EHRR 1 610
McLeod v United Kingdom (1998) 27 EHRR 493 601, 627
Miloslavsky v United Kingdom, (1995) 20 EHRR
Mitap and Muftuoglu v Turkey (1996) 22 EHRR 209 560
Monnell and Morris v United Kingdom (1988) 10 EHRR 205 568
Moore and Gordon v United Kingdom (1999) 29 EHRR 728 522
Muller v Switzerland (1988) 13 EHRR 212 187, 191, 197, 693, 699
Trang 39Murray v United Kingdom, (1994) 19 EHRR 193; (1996)
National Union of Belgium Police v Belgium (1975)
Neumeister v Austria (1968) 1 EHRR 91 410, 505, 557
News Verlags GmbH & Co KG v Austria (2000)
Niderost and Huber v Switzerland (1997) 25 EHRR 709 503
Niemietz v Germany (1992) 16 EHRR 97 604, 625, 628
Nilsen and Johnson v Norway (1999) 30 EHRR 878 690
Oberschlick v Austria (1991) 19 EHRR 389 683, 695
Oberschlick v Austria (No.2) (1997) 25 EHRR 357 692
The Observer and The Guardian v United Kingdom
Olsson v Sweden (No.2) (1992) 17 EHRR 134 624
Open Door and Dublin Well Woman v Ireland (1992) 15
Osman v United Kingdom (1998) 29 EHRR 245 261, 262, 486
Otto-Preminger-Institut v Austria (1994) 19 EHRR 34 651, 700
Pelissier and Sassi v France (1999) 30 EHRR 715 551
Pelladoah v Netherlands (1994) 19 EHRR 81 565
Perez de Rada Cavanilles v Spain (1998) 29 EHRR 109 483
Perks v United Kingdom (1999) 30 EHRR 33 377, 388, 568
Trang 40xxxviii table of cases
Philis v Greece (No.2) (1997) 25 EHRR 417 560
Pine Valley Developments Ltd v Ireland (1991) 14 EHRR 319 917Platform ‘ ¨Arzte F ¨ur Das Leben’ v Austria (1988)
Poitrimol v France (1994) 18 EHRR 130 487, 565
Prager and Oberschlick v Austria (1995) 21 EHRR 1 711
Pramstaller v Austria 23 October 1995 490, 495
Pullar v United Kingdom (1996) 22 EHRR 391 525, 570
Rasmussen v Denmark (1984) 7 EHRR 371 180, 613
Rees v United Kingdom (1986) 9 EHRR 56 618, 769, 772
Ribitsch v Austria (1995) 21 EHRR 573 305, 315
Rowe and Davis v United Kingdom 2000 30 EHRR 1 506
Sainte-Marie v France (1992) 16 EHRR 116 523
Sakik et al v Turkey (1997) 26 EHRR 662 417
Sanchez-Reisse v Switzerland (1986) 9 EHRR 71 421
Saraiva de Carvalho v Portugal 22 April 1994 523
Saunders v United Kingdom (1996) 23 EHRR 313 534, 576, 579
Schiesser v Switzerland (1979) 2 EHRR 417 408, 409