Astuces de recherche
trié par
30 Listé sur un total de 136 Entités
7 columns hidden
Titre | Date ajouter | Modèle | Document | Paragraph text | Organe | Type de document | Thematics | Thèmes | Personnes concernées | Année |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Article 9: Liberty and security of person 2014, para. 64 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | With regard to article 4 of the Covenant, the Committee first observes that, like the rest of the Covenant, article 9 applies also in situations of armed conflict to which the rules of international humanitarian law are applicable. While rules of international humanitarian law may be relevant for the purposes of the interpretation of article 9, both spheres of law are complementary, not mutually exclusive. Security detention authorized and regulated by and complying with international humanitarian law in principle is not arbitrary. In conflict situations, access by the International Committee of the Red Cross to all places of detention becomes an essential additional safeguard for the rights to liberty and security of person. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2014 | ||
Article 9: Liberty and security of person 2014, para. 1 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | The present general comment replaces general comment No. 8 (sixteenth session), adopted in 1982. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2014 | ||
Article 9: Liberty and security of person 2014, para. 61 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | The relationship between article 9 and article 14 of the Covenant, regarding civil and criminal trials, has already been illustrated. Article 9 addresses deprivation of liberty, only some instances of which take place in connection with civil or criminal proceedings within the scope of article 14. The procedural requirements of paragraphs 2 to 5 of article 9 apply in connection with proceedings falling within the scope of article 14 only when actual arrest or detention occurs. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2014 | ||
Article 9: Liberty and security of person 2014, para. 31 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | The first sentence of paragraph 3 applies to persons "arrested or detained on a criminal charge", while the second sentence concerns persons "awaiting trial" on a criminal charge. Paragraph 3 applies in connection with ordinary criminal prosecutions, military prosecutions and other special regimes directed at criminal punishment. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2014 | ||
Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression 2011, para. 29 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | The second legitimate ground is that of protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2011 | ||
Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression 2011, para. 5 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | Taking account of the specific terms of article 19, paragraph 1, as well as the relationship of opinion and thought (article 18), a reservation to paragraph 1 would be incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant. Furthermore, although freedom of opinion is not listed among those rights that may not be derogated from pursuant to the provisions of article 4 of the Covenant, it is recalled that, "in those provisions of the Covenant that are not listed in article 4, paragraph 2, there are elements that in the Committee's opinion cannot be made subject to lawful derogation under article 4". Freedom of opinion is one such element, since it can never become necessary to derogate from it during a state of emergency. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2011 | ||
Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression 2011, para. 36 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | The Committee reserves to itself an assessment of whether, in a given situation, there may have been circumstances which made a restriction of freedom of expression necessary. In this regard, the Committee recalls that the scope of this freedom is not to be assessed by reference to a "margin of appreciation" and in order for the Committee to carry out this function, a State party, in any given case, must demonstrate in specific fashion the precise nature of the threat to any of the enumerated grounds listed in paragraph 3 that has caused it to restrict freedom of expression. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2011 | ||
Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression 2011, para. 6 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | Taking account of the relationship of freedom of expression to the other rights in the Covenant, while reservations to particular elements of article 19, paragraph 2, may be acceptable, a general reservation to the rights set out in paragraph 2 would be incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2011 | ||
Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression 2011, para. 15 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | States parties should take account of the extent to which developments in information and communication technologies, such as internet and mobile based electronic information dissemination systems, have substantially changed communication practices around the world. There is now a global network for exchanging ideas and opinions that does not necessarily rely on the traditional mass media intermediaries. States parties should take all necessary steps to foster the independence of these new media and to ensure access of individuals thereto. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2011 | ||
Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression 2011, para. 1 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | This general comment replaces general comment No. 10 (nineteenth session). | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2011 | ||
Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression 2011, para. 17 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | Issues concerning the media are discussed further in the section of this general comment that addresses restrictions on freedom of expression. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2011 | ||
Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression 2011, para. 22 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | Paragraph 3 lays down specific conditions and it is only subject to these conditions that restrictions may be imposed: the restrictions must be "provided by law"; they may only be imposed for one of the grounds set out in subparagraphs (a) and (b) of paragraph 3; and they must conform to the strict tests of necessity and proportionality. Restrictions are not allowed on grounds not specified in paragraph 3, even if such grounds would justify restrictions to other rights protected in the Covenant. Restrictions must be applied only for those purposes for which they were prescribed and must be directly related to the specific need on which they are predicated. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2011 | ||
Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression 2011, para. 16 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | States parties should ensure that public broadcasting services operate in an independent manner. In this regard, States parties should guarantee their independence and editorial freedom. They should provide funding in a manner that does not undermine their independence. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2011 | ||
Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression 2011, para. 4 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | Among the other articles that contain guarantees for freedom of opinion and/or expression, are articles 18, 17, 25 and 27. The freedoms of opinion and expression form a basis for the full enjoyment of a wide range of other human rights. For instance, freedom of expression is integral to the enjoyment of the rights to freedom of assembly and association, and the exercise of the right to vote. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2011 | ||
Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression 2011, para. 8 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | States parties are required to ensure that the rights contained in article 19 of the Covenant are given effect to in the domestic law of the State, in a manner consistent with the guidance provided by the Committee in its general comment No. 31 on the nature of the general legal obligation imposed on States parties to the Covenant. It is recalled that States parties should provide the Committee, in accordance with reports submitted pursuant to article 40, with the relevant domestic legal rules, administrative practices and judicial decisions, as well as relevant policy level and other sectorial practices relating to the rights protected by article 19, taking into account the issues discussed in the present general comment. They should also include information on remedies available if those rights are violated. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2011 | ||
Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression 2011, para. 3 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | Freedom of expression is a necessary condition for the realization of the principles of transparency and accountability that are, in turn, essential for the promotion and protection of human rights. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2011 | ||
Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression 2011, para. 27 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | It is for the State party to demonstrate the legal basis for any restrictions imposed on freedom of expression. If, with regard to a particular State party, the Committee has to consider whether a particular restriction is imposed by law, the State party should provide details of the law and of actions that fall within the scope of the law. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2011 | ||
Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression 2011, para. 52 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | It is only with regard to the specific forms of expression indicated in article 20 that States parties are obliged to have legal prohibitions. In every case in which the State restricts freedom of expression it is necessary to justify the prohibitions and their provisions in strict conformity with article 19. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2011 | ||
Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression 2011, para. 51 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | What distinguishes the acts addressed in article 20 from other acts that may be subject to restriction under article 19, paragraph 3, is that for the acts addressed in article 20, the Covenant indicates the specific response required from the State: their prohibition by law. It is only to this extent that article 20 may be considered as lex specialis with regard to article 19. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2011 | ||
Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression 2011, para. 32 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | The Committee observed in general comment No. 22, that "the concept of morals derives from many social, philosophical and religious traditions; consequently, limitations... for the purpose of protecting morals must be based on principles not deriving exclusively from a single tradition". Any such limitations must be understood in the light of universality of human rights and the principle of non-discrimination | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2011 | ||
Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression 2011, para. 50 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | Articles 19 and 20 are compatible with and complement each other. The acts that are addressed in article 20 are all subject to restriction pursuant to article 19, paragraph 3. As such, a limitation that is justified on the basis of article 20 must also comply with article 19, paragraph 3. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2011 | ||
The obligations of States parties under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 2009, para. 20 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | Most States do not have specific enabling legislation to receive the Views of the Committee into their domestic legal order. The domestic law of some States parties does, however, provide for the payment of compensation to the victims of violations of human rights as found by international organs. In any case, States parties must use whatever means lie within their power in order to give effect to the Views issued by the Committee. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2009 | ||
The obligations of States parties under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 2009, para. 1 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights was adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by the same act of the General Assembly, resolution 2200 A (XXI) of 16 December 1966, by which the Covenant itself was adopted. Both the Covenant and the Optional Protocol entered into force on 23 March 1976. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2009 | ||
The obligations of States parties under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 2009, para. 12 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | The term used in article 5, paragraph 4, of the Optional Protocol to describe the decisions of the Committee is "Views". These decisions state the Committee's findings on the violations alleged by the author of a communication and, where a violation has been found, state a remedy for that violation. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2009 | ||
The obligations of States parties under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 2009, para. 9 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | In responding to a communication that appears to relate to a matter arising before the entry into force of the Optional Protocol for the State party (the ratione temporis rule), the State party should invoke that circumstance explicitly, including any comment on the possible "continuing effect" of a past violation. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2009 | ||
The obligations of States parties under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 2009, para. 6 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | Although not a term found in the Optional Protocol or the Covenant, the Human Rights Committee uses the description "author" to refer to an individual who has submitted a communication to the Committee under the Optional Protocol. The Committee uses the term "communication" contained in article 1 of the Optional Protocol instead of terms such as "complaint" or "petition", although the latter term is reflected in the current administrative structure of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, where communications under the Optional Protocol are initially handled by a section known as the Petitions Team. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2009 | ||
The obligations of States parties under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 2009, para. 4 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | Article 1 of the Optional Protocol provides that a State party to the Optional Protocol "recognizes the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications from individuals subject to its jurisdiction who claim to be victims of a violation by that State party of any of the rights set forth in the Covenant". It follows that States parties are obliged not to hinder access to the Committee and must prevent any retaliatory measures against any person who has submitted a communication to the Committee. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2009 | ||
The obligations of States parties under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 2009, para. 16 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | The Committee decided, in 1997, under its rules of procedure, to appoint a member of the Committee as Special Rapporteur for the follow-up of Views. That member, through written representations, and frequently also through personal meetings with diplomatic representatives of the State party concerned, urges compliance with the Committee's Views and discusses factors that may be impeding their implementation. In a number of cases, this procedure has led to acceptance and implementation of the Committee's Views where previously the transmission of those Views had met with no response. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2009 | ||
The obligations of States parties under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 2009, para. 3 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | The preamble to the Optional Protocol states that its purpose is "further to achieve the purposes" of the Covenant by enabling the Human Rights Committee, established in Part IV of the Covenant, "to receive and consider, as provided in the present Protocol, communications from individuals claiming to be victims of violations of any of the rights set forth in the Covenant". The Optional Protocol sets out a procedure, and imposes obligations on States parties to the Optional Protocol arising out of that procedure, in addition to their obligations under the Covenant. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2009 | ||
The obligations of States parties under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 2009, para. 11 | 19 août 2019 | Paragraph | While the function of the Human Rights Committee in considering individual communications is not, as such, that of a judicial body, the Views issued by the Committee under the Optional Protocol exhibit some of the principal characteristics of a judicial decision. They are arrived at in a judicial spirit, including the impartiality and independence of Committee members, the considered interpretation of the language of the Covenant, and the determinative character of the decisions. | Human Rights Committee
| General Comment / Recommendation |
|
| 2009 |