However, the author did not cooperate with the prison authorities.

The report is being submitted to the Board at its First Regular Session in 2005 instead of being presented to the Board at its Annual Session as in the past.

However, to convey to the author that the prerogative of mercy would not be exercised and his early release denied because of his human rights complaints reveals lack of humanity and amounts to treatment that fails to respect the author apos s dignity, in violation of article 10, paragraph 1.

At the time he filed that application, the author was no longer in Valladolid but in the Puerto I prison, Cádiz.

However, before the case against Toyota could be referred to the Tribunal, the parties entered into negotiations with the Commission to settle the case without referring.

However, as determined by the Panel in its Third Report, the failure to file a claim during the regular filing period on account of a claimant's belief that the programme would not be successful is not a satisfactory reason for late filing.

The Committee held that article 14, paragraph 5, not only guarantees that the judgement will be placed before a higher court, as happened in the author's case, but also that the conviction will undergo a second review, which was not the case for the author.

She preferred to see the matter dealt with in the Committee and not see it go to the General Assembly.

The State party adds that the author's claim that an individual cannot lodge an amparo application alleging that legal norms are unconstitutional is not accurate.

The author apos s initial complaint under article 14 of the Covenant was declared inadmissible for non exhaustion of domestic remedies.

(h) On 8 June 1999, the Supreme Court accepted in part the appeal filed by the author against a ruling of the Disciplinary Commission of the General Council of the Judiciary dated 27 January 1995 to set aside a complaint lodged by the author in January 1995 against a prison supervision judge in Valencia for failing to resolve his claims concerning his prison situation in a timely manner.

However, from our point of view, the referral should not be approved at any cost.

Accordingly, the Study Group preferred to refer, instead of principle , to the objective of systemic integration.

4.8 The State party argues that the interference with the author's right to privacy pursued a legitimate purpose (combating crime) and was proportionate, as the District Court ensured that the tapped conversations, in which Mr. A.T.M.M. acted as the author's lawyer, rather than a suspect of criminal offences, were not taken into account in the criminal proceedings against the author.

It was agreed that Rule 115 motions should be filed within 30 days of the date for filing the brief in reply instead of within 75 days from the date of the Trial Judgement.

In addition, the author's lawyer at the time who wrote the original complaint was told by the author that he did not want to get involved with a complaint against the police, so that the lawyer did not sign the complaint but handed it to the author to file on his own behalf.

Complaints alleging unsatisfactory application of the Charter cannot be submitted by individuals in their own right.

2.5 The author filed an application for reconsideration of the judgement, requesting that the evidence be properly assessed, taking into account that the expert evidence proposed by the defendant had been heard in court, while the testimony of the expert proposed by the author had been disallowed without cause.

However, the author does not explain the grounds for the complaint.

The Working Group regrets that the Government did not provide it with the requested information, despite repeated invitations to do so.

2.4 Although the District Court agreed with the author that the telephone calls between him and A.T.M.M., could not be used as evidence, insofar as the latter acted as the author's lawyer and not as a suspect, it rejected the author's challenge to the prosecution's case, noting that the prosecutor had not relied on the contested telephone conversations in establishing the author's guilt.

When the author's mother told him that he was not in, he went away threatening to kill him.

Consequently, the basis for the author's conviction was not contractual but legal.

Briefs in reply will now be filed within 10 days as compared to a previous 15 days.

The present report is submitted pursuant to that request.

However, the author's claims in this regard are general, and the Committee considers that the author has failed to provide sufficiently detailed information in order to substantiate them.

In submitting its national report, Norway shares the view that reporting should be done by all States parties and that it should be obligatory rather than optional.

240. The Committee commends the State party on the quality of its report, submitted in due time and drawn up in accordance with the Committee apos s guidelines.

However, during their interviews the claimants admitted that they were not contemporaneous, but were prepared recently for submission to the Commission.

The authors in the present communication chose not to submit their cases to the ECHR.

(c) The State to which the person is transferred shall not require the State from which the person was transferred to initiate extradition proceedings for the return of the person

(g) On 12 April 1999, the Constitutional Court rejected another application for amparo submitted by the author against the decision issued on 10 June 1998 by the Provincial High Court of Huelva concerning a complaint by the author that the prison authorities were not providing him with daily newspapers.

Article 14, paragraph 5, not only guarantees that the judgement will be placed before a higher court, as happened in the author's case, but also that the conviction will undergo a second review, which was not the case for the author.

With regard to his individual case, the author alleges that, on twelve occasions, he was locked up in a cell without being given water.

The author's first lawyer declared that applying for amparo had been proposed, but he had instead submitted an application for judicial review which had been declared inadmissible.

Instead, this evidence actually indicates that the owner of the real property or business was a family member of the deceased detainee who either did not file a claim during the regular filing period, or who filed a claim but did not seek compensation in respect of the real property or business the subject of the claim in the special instalment.

In its orders, the Court did in fact take the nature of the author apos s extended family into account when providing for the possibility for the children to stay with the family rather than with the author himself if he were not in a position to supervise them.

However, the author failed to lodge an amparo.

The author is not represented by counsel.

c) Suspicious transactions, irrespective of the amount mentioned in this paragraph.

D. Procedure in response to non submitted and

(b) Submission of the new consolidated report of the Secretary General to the Economic and Social Council rather than to the General Assembly

They supported the premise that States had a right rather than a duty to exercise diplomatic protection.

As for reporting, the GM's Managing Director presents an activities report rather than a full performance report to COP on behalf of the President of IFAD.

It noted that the author had submitted the communication solely in his own right and not on behalf of his wife or children, and concluded that the Committee could only consider whether the author's rights under articles 17 and 23 would be violated as a result of his removal.