X. International and Mixed Judicial and Quasi-judicial Bodies

Abubakar v. Ghana
Communication No. 103/93, Alhassan Abubakar v. Ghana, Decision, 20th Session, Grand Bay, 21–31 October 1996.
AI v. Malawi
Communication No. 68/92, Amnesty International (on behalf of Orton and Vera Chirwa) v. Malawi, Decision, 17th Session, Lomé, 13–22 March 1995.
Amnesty International and Others v. Sudan
Communication Nos. 48/90, 50/91, 52/91 and 89/93, Amnesty International and Others v. Sudan, Decision, 26th Session, Kigali, 1–15 November 1999.
Association of Members of the Episcopal Conference of East Africa v. Sudan
Communication No. 89/93, Association of Members of the Episcopal Conference of East Africa v. Sudan, Decision, 26th Session, Kigali, 1–15 November 1999.
Avocats Sans Frontières v. Burundi
Communication No. 231/99, Avocats Sans Frontières (on behalf of Gaëtan Bwampamye) v. Burundi, Decision, 28th Session, Cotonou, 23 October–6 November 2000.
Centre For Free Speech v. Nigeria
Communication No. 206/97, Centre For Free Speech v. Nigeria, Decision, 26th Session, Kigali, 15 November 1999.
Civil Liberties Organisation v. Chad
Communication No. 74/92, Civil Liberties Organisation v. Chad, Decision, 18th Session, Praia, 11 October 1995.
Civil Liberties Organisation v. Nigeria (129/94)
Communication No. 129/94, Civil Liberties Organisation v. Nigeria, Decision, 17th Session, Lomé, 13–22 March 1995.
Civil Liberties Organisation v. Nigeria (151/96)
Communication No. 151/96, Civil Liberties Organisation v. Nigeria, Decision, 26th Session, Kigali, 15 November 1999.
Civil Liberties Organisation and Others v. Nigeria
Communication No. 218/98, Civil Liberties Organisation, Legal Defence Centre, Legal Defence and Assistance Project v. Nigeria, Decision, 29th Session, Tripoli, 23 April–7 May 2001.
Constitutional Rights Project v. Nigeria (60/91)
Communication No. 60/91, Constitutional Rights Project (on behalf of Waheb Akamu, G. Adeaga, and Others) v. Nigeria, Decision, 17th Session, Lomé, 13–22 March 1995.
Constitutional Rights Project v. Nigeria (87/93)
Communication No. 87/93, Constitutional Rights Project (on behalf of Zamani Lakwot and 6 Others) v. Nigeria, Decision, 17th Session, Lomé, 13–22 March 1995.
Constitutional Rights Project v. Nigeria (148/96)
Communication No. 148/96, Constitutional Rights Project v. Nigeria, Decision, 26th Session, Kigali, 15 November 1999.
International Pen and Others v. Nigeria
Communications Nos. 137/94, 139/94, 154/96 and 161/97, International Pen, Constitutional Rights Project, Interrights, Civil Liberties Organisation (on behalf of Ken Saro-Wiwa Jr.) v. Nigeria, Decision, 24th Session, Banjul, 22–31 October 1998.
Krishna Achutan v. Malawi
Communication No. 64/92, Krishna Achutan (on behalf of Aleke Banda) v. Malawi, Decision, 16th Session, Banjul, 25 October–30 November 1994.
Malawi African Association and Others v. Mauritania
Communication No. 54/91, Malawi African Association v. Mauritania (combined with Communications No. 61/91, Amnesty International v. Mauritania, No. 98/93, Ms. Sarr Diop and Others v. Mauritania, Nos. 164/97-196/97, Collectif des Veuves et Ayants-droit v. Mauritania and No. 210/98, Association Mauritanienne des Droits de l’Homme v. Mauritania), Decision, 27th Session, Algiers, 11 May 2000.
Media Rights Agenda v. Nigeria
Communication No. 224/98, Media Rights Agenda (on behalf of Niran Malaolu) v. Nigeria, Decision, 28th Session, Cotonou, 23 October–6 November 2000.
Mouvement Burkinabé des Droits de l’Homme et des Peuples v. Burkina Faso
Communication No. 204/97, Mouvement Burkinabé des Droits de l’Homme et des Peuples v. Burkina Faso, Decision, 29th Session, Tripoli, 23 April–7 May 2001.
Pagnoulle v. Cameroon
Communication No. 39/90, Annette Pagnoulle (on behalf of Abdoulaye Mazou) v. Cameroon, Decision, 21st Session, Nouakchott, 15–24 April 1997.
RADDH v. Zambia
Communication No. 71/92, Rencontre Africaine pour la Défense des Droits de l’Homme v. Zambia, Decision, 20th Session, Grand Bay, 21–31 October 1996.
Union Inter-Africaine des Droits de l’Homme and Others v. Angola
Communication No. 159/96, Union Inter-Africaine des Droits de l’Homme, Fédération Internationale des Ligues des Droits de l’Homme, Rencontre Africaine des Droits de l’Homme, Organisation Nationale des Droits de l’Homme au Sénégal and Association Malienne des Droits de l’Homme v. Angola, Decision, 22nd Session, Banjul, 2–11 November 1997.
Cysne case
Special Arbitral Tribunal, Cysne Case (Portugal v. Germany), Decision of 30 June 1930, UNRIAA, Volume II, p. 1035.
Naulilaa case
Special Arbitral Tribunal, The Naulilaa Case (Portugal v. Germany), Decision of 31 July 1928, UNRIAA, Volume II, p. 1012.
Central Front, Eritrea’s Claim
Partial Award, Central Front, Eritrea’s Claims 2, 4, 6, 7, 8 & 22, The Hague, 28 April 2004.
Central Front, Ethiopia’s Claim
Partial Award, Central Front, Ethiopia’s Claim 2, The Hague, 28 April 2004.
Civilians Claims, Eritrea’s Claim
Partial Award, Civilians Claims, Eritrea’s Claims 15, 16, 23 & 27–32, The Hague, 17 December 2004.
Civilians Claims, Ethiopia’s Claim
Partial Award, Civilians Claims, Ethiopia’s Claim 5, The Hague, 17 December 2004.
Decision Number 7
Decision Number 7, Guidance Regarding Jus ad Bellum Liability, The Hague, 27 July 2007.
Eritrea’s Damages Claims
Final Award, Eritrea’s Damages Claims, The Hague, 17 August 2009.
Ethiopia’s Damages Claims
Final Award, Ethiopia’s Damages Claims, The Hague, 17 August 2009.
Loss of Property in Ethiopia Owned by Non-Residents, Eritrea’s Claim
Partial Award, Loss of Property in Ethiopia Owned by Non-Residents, Eritrea’s Claim 24, The Hague, 19 December 2005.
Ports, Ethiopia’s Claim
Final Award, Ports, Ethiopia’s Claim 6, The Hague, 19 December 2005.
Prisoners of War, Eritrea’s Claim
Partial Award, Prisoners of War, Eritrea’s Claim 17, The Hague, 1 July 2003.
Prisoners of War, Ethiopia’s Claim
Partial Award, Prisoners of War, Ethiopia’s Claim 4, The Hague, 1 July 2003.
Western and Eastern Fronts, Ethiopia’s Claim
Partial Award, Western and Eastern Fronts, Ethiopia’s Claims 1 & 3, The Hague, 19 December 2005.
Western Front, Aerial Bombardment and Related Claims, Eritrea’s Claim
Partial Award, Western Front, Aerial Bombardment and Related Claims, Eritrea’s Claims 1, 3, 5, 9–13, 14, 21, 25 & 26, The Hague, 19 December 2005.
Can case
Elvan Can v. Austria, Application No. 9300/81, Report adopted on 12 July 1984, annexed to Elvan Can v. Austria, Judgment of the ECtHR of 30 September 1985, Series A No. 96, p. 13; full text in: European Court of Human Rights publications, Series B No. 79, p. 12.
Chrysostomos and Papachrysostomou v. Turkey
Metropolitan Chrysostomos and Archimandrite Georgios Papachrysostomou v. Turkey, Applications Nos. 15299/89 and 15300/89, Report adopted on 8 July 1993, Decisions and Reports 86-B, p. 4.
Donnelly v. UK
Donnelly and 6 Others v. the United Kingdom, Applications Nos. 5577-5583/72, Decision of 15 December 1976 on the admissibility of the application, Decisions and Reports 4, p. 85.
Dujardin and Others v. France
Laurence Dujardin and Others v. France, Application No. 16734/90, Decision of 2 September 1991 on the admissibility of the application, Decisions and Reports 72(1992), pp. 236 ff.
Ensslin, Baader and Raspe v. FRG
Gudrun Ensslin, Andreas Baader and Jan Raspe v. Federal Republic of Germany, Applications Nos. 7572/76, 7586/76 and 7587/76, Decision of 8 July 1978 on the admissibility of the applications, Decisions and Reports 14, p. 64.
France and Others v. Turkey
France, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands v. Turkey, Applications Nos. 9940-9944/82 (joined), Decision of 6 December 1983 on the admissibility of the applications, Decisions and Reports 40, p. 143.
Greek case
Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the Netherlands v. Greece, Application Nos. 3321/67, 3322/67, 3323/67 and 3344/67, Report adopted on 5 November 1969, Yearbook of the European Convention on Human Rights, Vol. 12, 1969-II, p. 1.
Haase v. FRG
Dieter Haase v. Federal Republic of Germany, Application No. 7412/76, Report adopted on 12 July 1977, Decisions and Reports 11, p. 78.
Hazar and Acik v. Turkey
Nesrin Hazar, Gür Hazar and Rüstü Acik v. Turkey, Applications Nos. 16311/90, 16312/90 and 16313/90, Decision of 11 October 1991 on the admissibility of the applications, Decisions and Reports 72, p. 200.
Kröcher and Möller v. Switzerland
Gabriele Kröcher and Christian Möller v. Switzerland, Application No. 8463/78, Report adopted 16 December 1982, Decisions and Reports 26, p. 24.
Kurt v. Turkey
Koçeri and Üzeyir Kurt v. Turkey, Application No. 24276/94, Report adopted on 5 December 1996, annexed to ECtHR Judgment of 25 May 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-III.
McFeeley and Others v. UK
Thomas McFeeley and Others v. the United Kingdom, Application No. 8317/78, Decision of 15 May 1980 on the admissibility of the application, Decisions and Reports 20, p. 44.
McQuiston and Others v. UK
McQuiston and Others v. the United Kingdom, Application No. 11208/84, Decision of 4 March 1986 on the admissibility of the application, Decisions and Reports 46, p. 182.
McVeigh, O’Neill and Evans v. UK
Bernard Leo McVeigh, Oliver Anthony O’Neill and Arthur Walter Evans v. the United Kingdom, Applications Nos. 8022/77, 8025/77 and 8027/77 (joined), Report adopted on 18 March 1981, Decisions and Reports 25, p. 15.
Ofner and Hopfinger v. Austria
Herbert Ofner and Alois Hopfinger v. Austria, Applications Nos. 524/59 and 617/59 (joined), Report of 23 November 1962, Yearbook of the European Convention on Human Rights, 1963.
Sakik, Türk, Alinak, Zana, Dicle and Dogan v. Turkey
S. Sakik, A. Türk, M. Alinak, L. Zana, M. H. Dicle and O. Dogan v. Turkey, Applications Nos. 23879/94, 23880/94, 23881/94, 23882/94 and 23883/94 (joined), Decision of 25 May 1995 on the admissibility of the application, Decisions and Reports 81-A, p. 86.
Sargin and Yagci v. Turkey
Nihat Sargin and Nabi Yagci v. Turkey, Applications Nos. 14116/88 and 14117/88 (joined), Decision of 11 May 1989 on the admissibility of the applications, Decisions and Reports 61, p. 250.
Second Greek case
Denmark, Norway and Sweden v. Greece, Application No. 4448/70, Decision of 16 July 1970 on the admissibility of the application, Yearbook of the European Convention on Human Rights 1970, p. 120.
Selçuk and Asker v. Turkey
Selçuk and Asker v. Turkey, Applications Nos. 23184/94 and 23185/94, Report adopted on 28 November 1996 (not yet published).
Treholt v. Norway
Arne Treholt v. Norway, Application No. 14610/89, Decision of 9 July 1991 on the admissibility of the application, Decisions and Reports 71, p. 168.
Van Droogenbroeck v. Belgium
Van Droogenbroeck v. Belgium, Application No. 7906/77, Decision of 5 July 1979 on the admissibility of the application, Decisions and Reports 17, p. 59.
W. v. Ireland
W. v. Ireland, Application No. 9360/81, Decision of 28 February 1983 on the admissibility of the application, Decisions and Reports 33, p. 211.
X v. Austria
X v. Austria, Application No. 6185/73, Decision of 29 May 1975 on the admissibility of the application, Decisions and Reports 2, p. 68.
X v. FRG
X v. Federal Republic of Germany, Application No. 6946/75, Decision of 6 July 1976 on the admissibility of the application, Decisions and Reports 6, p. 114.
X v. FRG
X v. Federal Republic of Germany, Application No. 10098/82, Decision of 7 May 1984 on the admissibility of the application, 8 EHRR 1986, p. 225.
X v. UK
X v. the United Kingdom, Application No. 8158/78, Decision of 10 July 1980 on the admissibility of the application, Decisions and Reports 21, p. 95.
X v. UK
X v. the United Kingdom, Application No. 9054/80, Decision of 8 October 1982 on the admissibility of the application, Decisions and Reports 30, p. 113.
Adolf v. Austria
Adolf v. Austria, Judgment of 26 March 1982, Series A No. 49.
A v. UK
A v. the United Kingdom, Judgment (Chamber) of 23 September 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VI.
Andersson v. Sweden
Margareta and Roger Andersson v. Sweden, Judgment of 25 February 1992, Series A No. 226-A.
Akdeniz and Others v. Turkey
Akdeniz and Others v. Turkey, Judgment (Merits and just Satisfaction) of 31 May 2001 (not yet published).
Akdivar and Others v. Turkey
Akdivar and Others v. Turkey, Judgment of 16 September 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-IV.
Aksoy v. Turkey
Aksoy v. Turkey, Judgment of 18 December 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-VI.
Albert and Le Compte case
Albert and Le Compte v. Belgium, Judgment of 10 February 1983, Series A No. 58.
Allenet de Ribemont v. France
Allenet de Ribemont v. France, Judgment of 10 February 1995, Series A No. 308.
A. P., M. P. and T. P. v. Switzerland
A. P., M. P. and T. P. v. Switzerland, Judgment of 29 August 1997, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-V.
Averill v. UK
Averill v. the United Kingdom, Judgment of 6 June 2000, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 2000-VI.
Avsar v. Turkey
Avsar v. Turkey, Judgment of 10 July 2001, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 2001-VII.
Aydin v. Turkey
Aydin v. Turkey, Judgment of 25 September 1997, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-VI.
B. v. UK
B. v. UK, Judgment of 8 July 1987, Series A No. 21.
Belilos case
Belilos v. Switzerland, Judgment of 29 April 1988, Series A No. 132.
Belziuk v. Poland
Belziuk v. Poland, Judgment of 25 March 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-II.
Benthem case
Benthem v. the Netherlands, Judgment of 23 October 1985, Series A No. 97.
Boddaert v. Belgium
Boddaert v. Belgium, Judgment of 12 October 1992, Series A No. 235-D.
Borgers v. Belgium
Borgers v. Belgium, Judgment of 30 October 1991, Series A No. 214-B.
Bouamar case
Bouamar v. Belgium, Judgment of 29 February 1988, Series A No. 129.
Brannigan and McBride v. UK
Brannigan and McBride v. the United Kingdom, Judgment of 26 May 1993, Series A No. 258-B.
Brogan and Others case
Brogan and Others v. the United Kingdom, Judgment of 29 November 1988, Series A No. 145-B.
Bulut v. Austria
Bulut v. Austria, Judgment, 22 February 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-II.
Can v. Austria
Can v. Austria, Judgment of 30 September 1985, Series A No. 96.
Campbell and Cosans case
Campbell and Cosans v. the United Kingdom, Judgment of 25 February 1982, Series A No. 48.
Campbell and Fell case
Campbell and Fell v. the United Kingdom, Judgment of 28 June 1984, Series A No. 80.
Coëme and Others v. Belgium
Guy Coëme, Jean-Louis Mazy, Jean-Louis Stalport (originally, then his heirs), Auguste Merry Hermanus and Camille Javeau v. Belgium, Judgment of 22 June 2000, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 2000-VII.
Colozza case
Colozza v. Italy, Judgment of 12 February 1985, Series A No. 89.
Corigliano case
Corigliano v. Italy, Judgment of 10 December 1982, Series A No. 57.
Cyprus case
Cyprus v. Turkey (Merits), Judgment of 10 May 2001, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 2001-IV.
De Cubber case
De Cubber v. Belgium, Judgment of 26 October 1984, Series A No. 86.
De Jong, Baljet and Van den Brink case
De Jong, Baljet and Van den Brink v. the Netherlands, Judgment of 22 May 1984, Series A No. 77.
Demiray v. Turkey
Demiray v. Turkey, Judgment of 21 November 2000, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 2000-XII.
Deweer case
Deweer v. Belgium, Judgment of 27 February 1980, Series A No. 35.
De Wilde, Ooms and Versyp v. Belgium
De Wilde, Ooms and Versyp v. Belgium (“Vagrancy” case), Judgment of 18 June 1971, Series A No. 12.
Ekbatani v. Sweden
Ekbatani v. Sweden, Judgment of 26 May 1988, Series A No. 134.
Engel v. Netherlands
Engel v. the Netherlands, Judgment of 8 June 1976, Series A No. 22.
Ergi v. Turkey
Ergi v. Turkey, Judgment of 28 July 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-IV.
Eriksson case
Eriksson v. Sweden, Judgment of 22 June 1989, Series A No. 156.
Farmakopoulos v. Belgium
Farmakopoulos v. Belgium, Judgment of 27 March 1992, Series A No. 235-A.
F. C. B. v. Italy
F. C. B. v. Italy, Judgment of 28 August 1991, Series A No. 208-B.
Findlay v. UK
Findlay v. the United Kingdom, Judgment of 25 February 1997, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-I.
Fox, Campbell and Hartley
Fox, Campbell and Hartley v. the United Kingdom, Judgment of 30 August 1990, Series A No. 182.
Funke case
Funke v. France, Judgment of 25 February 1993, Series A No. 256-A.
Golder v. UK
Golder v. the United Kingdom, Judgment of 21 February 1975, Series A No. 18 (1975)
Gül v. Switzerland
Gül v. Switzerland, Judgment (Chamber) of 19 February 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-I.
Hadjianastassiou v. Greece
Hadjianastassiou v. Greece, Judgment of 16 December 1992, Series A No. 252.
Herczegfalvy v. Austria
Herczegfalvy v. Austria, Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) of 24 September 1992, Series A No. 244.
Hokkanen v. Finland
Hokkanen v. Finland, Judgment of 23 September 1994, Series A No. 299-A.
Holm v. Sweden
Holm v. Sweden, Judgment of 25 November 1993, Series A No. 279-A.
Hussain v. UK
Hussain v. the United Kingdom, Judgment of 21 February 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-I.
Imbrioscia v. Switzerland
Imbrioscia v. Switzerland, Judgment of 24 November 1993, Series A No. 275.
Ireland v. UK
Ireland v. the United Kingdom, Judgment of 18 January 1978, Series A No. 25.
Jabari v. Turkey
Jabari v. Turkey, Judgment of 11 July 2000, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 2000-VIII.
J. J. v. the Netherlands
J. J. v. the Netherlands, Judgment of 27 March 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-II.
Johnston and Others v. Ireland
Johnston and Others v. Ireland, Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) of 18 December 1986, Series A No. 112.
K. v. Austria
K. v. Austria, Judgment of 2 June 1993, Series A No. 255-B.
Kalogeropoulou and Others v. Greece and Germany
Aikaterini Kalogeropoulou and Others v. Greece and Germany, Case No. 59021/00, Decision on admissibility, 12 December 2002 (not yet published).
Kamasinski case
Kamasinski v. Austria, Judgment of 19 December 1989, Series A No. 168.
Kaya v. Turkey
Kaya v. Turkey, Judgment of 19 February 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-I.
Kemmache v. France
Kemmache v. France, Judgment of 27 November 1991, Series A No. 218.
K.-H. W. v. Germany
K.-H. W. v. Germany, Judgment of 22 March 2001 (not yet published).
Kokkinakis v. Greece
Kokkinakis v. Greece, Judgment of 25 May 1993, Series A No. 260-A.
Kolompar v. Belgium
Kolompar v. Belgium, Judgment of 24 September 1992, Series A No. 235-C.
König v. Germany
König v. Federal Republic of Germany (Merits), Judgment of 28 June 1978, Series A No. 27.
Kremzow v. Austria
Kremzow v. Austria, Judgment of 21 September 1993, Series A No. 268-B.
Kurt v. Turkey
Koçeri Kurt v. Turkey, Judgment of 25 May 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-III.
Lamy case
Lamy v. Belgium, Judgment of 30 March 1989, Series A No. 151.
Lawless case
G. R. Lawless v. Ireland (Merits), Judgment of 1 July 1961, Series A No. 3.
Letellier v. France
Letellier v. France, Judgment of 26 June 1991, Series A No. 207.
Loizidou v. Turkey
Preliminary Objections:
Loizidou v. Turkey (Preliminary Objections), Judgment of 23 March 1995, Series A No. 310.
Merits:
Loizidou v. Turkey (Merits and Just Satisfaction), Judgment of 18 December 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-VI. Luedicke, Belkacem and Koç case
Luedicke, Belkacem and Koç v. Feredal Republic of Germany, Judgment of 28 November 1978, Series A No. 29.
McCann and Others v. UK
McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, Judgment of 27 September 1995, Series A No. 324.
McElhinney v. Ireland
McElhinney v. Ireland, Judgment (Merits) of 21 November 2001, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 2001-XI.
Matznetter v. Austria
Matznetter v. Austria, Judgment of 10 November 1969, Series A No. 10.
Megyeri v. Germany
Megyeri v. Germany, Judgment of 12 May 1992, Series A No. 237-A.
Mentes and Others v. Turkey
Mentes and Others v. Turkey, Judgment of 28 November 1997, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-VIII.
Moustaquim v. Belgium
Moustaquim v. Belgium, Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) of 18 February 1991, Series A No. 193.
Murray v. UK
Murray v. the United Kingdom, Judgment of 28 October 1994, Series A No. 300-A.
Navarra v. France
Navarra v. France, Judgment of 23 November 1993, Series A No. 273-B.
Neumeister v. Austria
Neumeister v. Austria, Judgment (Merits) of 27 June 1968, Series A No. 8.
Olsson v. Sweden
Olsson v. Sweden (No. 2), Judgment of 27 November 1992, Series A No. 250.
Pakelli case
Pakelli v. Federal Republic of Germany, Judgment of 25 April 1983, Series A No. 64.
Piersack case
Piersack v. Belgium, Judgment of 1 October 1982, Series A No. 53.
Poitrimol v. France
Poitrimol v. France, Judgment of 23 November 1993, Series A No. 277-A.
Quaranta v. Switzerland
Quaranta v. Switzerland, Judgment of 24 May 1991, Series A No. 205.
Rieme v. Sweden
Rieme v. Sweden, Judgment of 22 April 1992, Series A No. 226-B.
Ringeisen case
Ringeisen v. Austria, Judgment of 16 July 1971, Series A No. 13.
Sahiner v. Turkey
Sahiner v. Turkey, Judgment of 25 September 2001 (not yet published).
Sánchez-Reisse case
Sánchez-Reisse v. Switzerland, Judgment of 21 October 1986, Series A No. 107.
Schiesser v. Switzerland
Schiesser v. Switzerland, Judgment of 4 December 1979, Series A No. 34.
Scopelliti v. Italy
Scopelliti v. Italy, Judgment of 23 November 1993, Series A No. 278.
Selçuk and Asker v. Turkey
Selçuk and Asker v. Turkey, Judgment of 24 April 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-II.
Serves v. France
Serves v. France, Judgment (Chamber) of 20 October 1997, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-VI.
Singh v. UK
Singh v. the United Kingdom, Judgment (Chamber) of 21 February 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-I.
Stefanelli v. San Marino
Stefanelli v. San Marino, Judgment of 8 February 2000, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 2000-II.
Stögmüller case
Stögmüller v. Austria, Judgment of 10 November 1969, Series A No. 9.
S. W. v. UK
S. W. v. the United Kingdom, Judgment of 22 November 1995, Series A, No. 335-B
Tekin v. Turkey
Tekin v. Turkey, Judgment of 9 June 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-IV.
Timurtas v. Turkey
Timurtas v. Turkey, Judgment of 13 June 2000, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 2000-VI.
Tomasi v. France
Tomasi v. France, Judgment of 27 August 1992, Series A No. 241-A.
Toth v. Austria
Toth v. Austria, Judgment of 12 December 1991, Series A No. 224.
Tyrer case
Tyrer v. the United Kingdom, Judgment of 25 April 1978, Series A No. 26.
Valasinas v. Lithuania
Valasinas v. Lithuania, Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) of 24 July 2001, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 2001-VIII.
Van der Leer v. Netherlands
Van der Leer v. the Netherlands, Judgment of 21 February 1990, Series A No. 170-A.
Van der Mussele v. Belgium
Van der Mussele v. Belgium, Judgment of 23 November 1983, Series A No. 70.
Van Droogenbroeck case
Van Droogenbroeck v. Belgium, Judgment of 24 June 1982, Series A No. 50.
Vermeire v. Belgium
Vermeire v. Belgium, Judgment (Merits) of 29 November 1991, Series A No. 214-C.
Wemhoff case
Wemhoff v. Federal Republic of Germany, Judgment of 27 June 1968, Series A No. 7.
Woukam Moudefo case
Woukam Moudefo v. France, Judgment of 11 October 1988, Series A No. 141-B.
X v. UK
X v. the United Kingdom, Judgment of 5 November 1981, Series A No. 46.
Yasa v. Turkey
Yasa v. Turkey, Judgment of 2 September 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VI.
Ieng Sary case
– Provisional Detention Order
Provisional Detention Order, Ieng Sary, 14 November 2007, Investigation No. 002/19-09-2007-ECCC/OCIJ.
Ieng Thirith case
– Provisional Detention Order
Provisional Detention Order, Ieng Thirith, 14 November 2007, Investigation No. 002/19-09-2007-ECCC/OCIJ.
Kaing case
– Provisional Detention Order
Provisional Detention Order, Kaing Guek Eav (alias: Duch), 31 July 2007, Investigation No. 001/18-07-2007.
– Judgment
Co-Prosecutors v. Kaing Guek Eav (alias: Duch), Judgment, Trial Chamber, 26 July 2010, Case File/Dossier No. 001/18-07-2007/ECCC/TC.
Khieu case
– Provisional Detention Order
Provisional Detention Order, Khieu Samphan, 19 November 2007, Investigation No. 002/19-09-2007-ECCC/OCIJ.
Nuon case
– Provisional Detention Order
Provisional Detention Order, Nuon Chea, 19 September 2007, Investigation No. 002/19-09-2007.
Case 1954 (Uruguay)
Uruguay, Case 1954, Cribari, Resolution No. 17/81 of 6 March 1981, IACiHR Annual Report 1981–1982, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.57, Doc. 6 rev.1, 20 September 1982, p. 93.
Case 6718 (El Salvador)
El Salvador, Case 6718, Pedro Gómez and Others (Santa Marta), Report No. 23/83 of 4 October 1983, IACiHR Annual Report 1983–1984, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.63, Doc. 10, 24 September 1984, p. 37.
Case 6724 (El Salvador)
El Salvador, Case 6724, Loyola and Others, Resolution No. 14/85 of 5 March 1985, IACiHR Annual Report 1984–1985, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.66, Doc. 10 rev.1, 1 October 1985, p. 79.
Case 7481 (Bolivia)
Bolivia, Case 7481, Caracoles Community, Resolution No. 30/82 of 8 March 1982, IACiHR Annual Report 1981–1982, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.57, Doc. 6 rev.1, 20 September 1982, p. 36.
Case 9213 (US)
Report on the admissibility:
United States, Case 9213, Richmond Hill Insane Asylum v. United States,
Report on the admissibility of the petition, Annual Report, 1986–1987,
Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.71, Doc. 9 rev.1, 22 September 1987, pp. 198–207;
Report to conclude the case:
Report No. 3/96 to conclude Case 9213, 1 March 1996, IACiHR Annual
Report 1995, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.91, Doc. 7 rev., 28 February 1996, p. 201.
Case 9466 (Peru)
Peru, Case 9466, Teodoro Huancahuari, Resolution No. 21/87 of 30 June 1987, IACiHR Annual Report 1986–1987, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.71, Doc. 9 rev.1, 22 September 1987, p. 131.
Case 9619 (Honduras)
Honduras, Case 9619, Romero and Others (Colomoncagua Attack), Resolution No. 5/87 of 28 March 1987, IACiHR Annual Report 1986–1987, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.71, Doc. 9 rev.1, 22 September 1987, p. 75.
Case 9786 (Peru)
Peru, Case 9786, Juan Geldres Orozco and Benigno Contreras, Resolution No. 33/88 of 14 September 1988, IACiHR Annual Report 1988–1989, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.76, Doc. 10, 18 September 1989, p. 33.
Case 9844 (El Salvador)
El Salvador, Case 9844, Rivas Hernández, Resolution No. 28/88 of 13 September 1988, IACiHR Annual Report 1987–1988, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.74, Doc. 10 rev.1, 16 September 1988, p. 140.
Case 9850 (Argentina)
Argentina, Case 9850, Hector Geronimo Lopez Aurelli, Report No. 74/90 of 4 October 1990, Resolution No. 22/88 of 23 March 1988, IACiHR Annual Report 1990–1991, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.79.rev.1, Doc. 12, 22 February 1991.
Case 10.000 (El Salvador)
El Salvador, Case 10.000, Wilfredo Najarro Rivas, Report No. 2/91 of 13 February 1991, Annual Report 1990–1991, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.79.rev.1, Doc. 12, 22 February 1991, p. 96.
Case 10.001 (El Salvador)
El Salvador, Case 10.001, Walter Chávez Palacios, Report No. 3/91 of 13 February 1991, Annual Report 1990–1991, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.79.rev.1, Doc. 12, 22 February 1991, p. 100.
Case 10.037 (Argentina)
Argentina, Case 10.037, Mario Eduardo Firmenich, Resolution No. 17/89 of 13 April 1989, IACiHR Annual Report 1988–1989, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.76, Doc. 10, 18 September 1989, p. 36.
Case 10.124 (Suriname)
Suriname, Case 10.124, Massacre at Tjongalangapassie, Resolution No. 22/89 of 27 September 1989, IACiHR Annual Report 1988–1989, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.76, Doc. 10, 18 September 1989, p. 143.
Cases 10.147, 10.181, 10.240, 10.262, 10.309 and 10.311 (Argentina)
Argentina, Case 10.147: Alicia Consuelo Herrera; Case 10.181: Rosaria Valenzi de Sánchez; Case 10.240: Case of the Naval Mechanic School; Case 10.262: Fundación Servicio Paz y Justicia (90 cases); Case 10.309: Luis Adolfo Holmquits, Graciela Bustamante de Argañaraz, Gloria Constanza Curia, Fernando Ramiro Curia, Luisa Ana Ibañez, Adriana C. Mitrovich de Torres Correa, Ricardo Torres Correa, Francisco Rafael Díaz, Ramón Oscar Bianchi, María Isabel Jiménez de Soldatti, Rondoletto Family (5), Julio César Campopiano, Ana Cristina Corral, Carlos Severino Soldatti; Case 10.311: Rosa Ana Frigerio, Omar Tristán Roldán, Elena Delia Garaguso, Carlos Alberto Oliva, Laura Susana Martinelli, Liliana Carmen Pereyra, Eduardo Alberto Cagnola, Jorge Candeloro, Marta Haydée García, Omar Alejandro Marocchi, Susana Valor, Eduardo Manuel Martínez, Jorge Carlos Augusto Toledo, Mario Alberto D’Fabio Fernández, Roberto Wilson, Rubén Darío Rodríguez, Juan Carlos Carrizo, Haydee Cristina Monier, Horacio Manuel Carrizo, Alberto Rogelio Carrizo, Luis Alberto Bereciarte, Fernando Hallgarten, Report No. 28/92 of 2 October 1992, IACiHR Annual Report 1992–1993, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.83, Doc. 14, 2 March 1993, p. 41.
Case 10.179 (El Salvador)
El Salvador, Case 10.179, Sebastián Gutiérrez, José Mario Cruz Rivera y Félix Rivera, Resolution No. 26/89 of 28 September 1989, IACiHR Annual Report 1989–1990, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.77, Doc. 7, 17 May 1990, p. 36.
Case 10.190 (El Salvador)
El Salvador, Case 10.190, José Ángel Alas Gómez, Resolution No. 6/92 of 4 February 1992, IACiHR Annual Report 1992, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.81.rev. 1, Doc. 6, 14 February 1992, p. 99.
Case 10.198 (Nicaragua)
Nicaragua, Case 10.198, Reynaldo Tadeo Aguado Montealegre, Resolution No. 29/89 of 29 September 1989, IACiHR Annual Report 1989–1990, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.77, Doc. 7, 17 May 1990, p. 73.
Case 10.284 (El Salvador)
El Salvador, Case 10.284, Manuel de Jesús Monguia Choto, Resolution No. 11/92 of 4 February 1992, IACiHR Annual Report 1992, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.81, Doc. 6, 14 February 1992, p. 149.
Case 10.287 (El Salvador)
El Salvador, Case 10.287, Las Hojas massacres, Report No. 26/92 of 24 September 1992, IACiHR Annual Report 1992–1993, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.83, Doc. 14, 12 March 1993, p. 83.
Case 10.447 (El Salvador)
El Salvador, Case 10.447, Leonardo Ramírez Murcia, Resolution No. 14/92 of 4 February 1992, IACiHR Annual Report 1992–1993, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.81.rev.1, Doc. 6, 14 February 1992, p. 149.
Case 10.480 (El Salvador)
El Salvador, Case 10.480, Lucio Parada Cea and Others, Report No. 1/99 of 27 January 1999, IACiHR Annual Report 1998, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.102, Doc. 6 rev., 16 April 1999, p. 531.
Case 10.508 (Guatemala)
Guatemala, Case 10.508, Roberto Lissardi and Dino Rossi, Report No. 25/94 of 22 September 1994, IACiHR Annual Report 1988–1989, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.88, Doc. 9 rev., 17 February 1995, p. 51.
Case 10.559 (Peru)
Peru, Case 10.559, Chumbivilcas, Report No. 1/96 of 1 March 1996, IACiHR Annual Report 1995, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.91, Doc. 7 rev., 28 February 1996, p. 136.
Case 10.581 (Colombia)
Colombia, Case 10.581, Alirio de Jesús Pedraza, Report No. 33/92 of 25 September 1992, IACiHR Annual Report 1992–1993, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.83, Doc. 14 corr. 1, 12 March 1993, p. 61.
Case 10.970 (Peru)
Peru, Case 10.970, Raquel Martí de Mejía, Report No. 5/96 of 1 March 1996, IACiHR Annual Report 1995, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.91, Doc. 7 rev., 28 February 1996, p. 157.
Case 11.006 (Peru)
Peru, Case 11.006, Alan García, Report No. 1/95 of 7 February 1995, IACiHR Annual Report 1994, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.88, Doc. 9 rev., 17 February 1995, p. 71.
Case 11.010 (Colombia)
Colombia, Case 11.010, Hildegard María Feldman, Report 15/95 of 13 September 1995, IACiHR Annual Report 1995, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.91, Doc. 7 rev., 28 February 1996, p. 57.
Case 11.084 (Peru)
Peru, Case 11.084, Jaime Salinas, Report No. 27/94 of 30 November 1994, IACiHR Annual Report 1994, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.88, Doc. 9 rev., 17 February 1995, p. 113.
Case 11.137 (Argentina)
Argentina, Case 11.137, Juan Carlos Abella, Report 55/97 of 18 November 1997, IACiHR Annual Report 1997, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.98, Doc. 7 rev., 13 April 1998, p. 271.
Case 11.139 (US)
US, Case 11.139, William Andrews, Report 57/96 of 6 December 1996, IACiHR Annual Report 1997, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.98, Doc. 6 rev., 13 April 1998.
Case 11.205 and Others
Argentina, Cases 11.205, 11.236, 11.238, 11.239, 11.242, 11.243, 11.244, 11.247, 11.248, 11.249, 11.251, 11.254, 11.255, 11.257, 11.258, 11.261, 11.263, 11.305, 11.320, 11.326, 11.330, 11.499, 11.504, Jorge Luis Bronstein and Others, Report No. 2/97 of 11 March 1997, IACiHR Annual Report 1997, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.98, Doc. 6 rev., 13 April 1998.
Case 11.245 (Argentina)
Argentina, Case 11.245, Jorge A. Giménez, Report No. 12/96 of 1 March 1996, IACiHR Annual Report 1995, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.91, Doc. 7 rev., 28 February 1996, p. 33.
Case 11.589 (Cuba)
Cuba, Case 11.589, Armando Alejandre Jr., Carlos Costa, Mario De La Peña and Pablo Morales, Report No. 86/99 of 29 September 1999, IACiHR Annual Report 1999, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.106, Doc. 6 rev., 13 April 1999.
Cases of Disappeared Persons (Argentina)
Argentina, Cases of Disappeared Persons in Argentina, Resolution No. 1/83 of 8 April 1983, IACiHR Annual Report 1982–1983, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.61, Doc. 22 rev.1, 27 September 1983, p. 46.
Cases of Disappeared Persons (Chile)
Chile, Cases of Disappeared Persons in Chile, Resolution No. 11/83 of 1 July 1983, IACiHR Annual Report 1982–1983, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.61, Doc. 22 rev.1, 27 September 1983, p. 46.
Case of Disappeared Persons (Guatemala)
Guatemala, Case of Disappeared Persons in Guatemala, Resolution No. 25/86 of 9 April 1986, IACiHR Annual Report 1985–1986, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.68, Doc. 8 rev.1 26 September 1986, p. 37.
Case of the Riofrío massacre (Colombia)
Colombia, Case 11.654, Riofrío massacre, Report No. 62/01 of 6 April 2001, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.111, Doc. 20 rev., p. 758.
Monsignor Oscar Arnulfo Romero y Galdámez (El Salvador)
El Salvador, Case No. 11.481 (El Salvador), Monsignor Oscar Arnulfo Romero y Galdámez, Report No. 37/00 of 13 April 2000, IACiHR Annual Report 1999, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.106, Doc. 6 rev., 13 April 1999.
Aloeboetoe and Others case
Aloeboetoe and Others v. Suriname, Judgment of 4 December 1991, Series C No. 11 (1991), IACtHR Annual Report 1991, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/III.25, Doc. 7, 15 January 1992, p. 57.
Bámaca Velásquez case
Bámaca Velásquez v. Guatemala, Judgment of 25 November 2000, Series C No. 70 (2000).
Bámaca Velásquez case (Reparations)
Bámaca Velásquez v. Guatemala, Judgment of 22 February 2002, Series C No. 91 (2002).
Barrios Altos case
Chumbipuma Aguirre and Others v. Peru, Judgment of 14 March 2001, Series C No. 75 (2001).
Caballero Delgado and Santana case
Caballero Delgado and Santana v. Colombia, Judgment of 8 December 1995, Series C No. 22 (1995), IACtHR Annual Report 1996, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/III.33, Doc. 4, 22 January 1996, p. 135.
Castillo Petruzzi and Others case
Castillo Petruzzi and Others v. Peru, Judgment of 30 May 1999, Series C No. 52 (1999).
Exceptions to the Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies case
Exceptions to the Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies (Articles 46(1), 46(2)(a) and 46(2)(b) ACHR), Advisory Opinion OC-11/90 of 10 August 1990, Ser. A No. 11 (1990), IACtHR Annual Report 1990, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/III.23, Doc. 12, 16 January 1991, p. 37.
Godínez Cruz case
Godínez Cruz v. Honduras, Judgment of 20 January 1989, Series C No. 5 (1989), IACtHR Annual Report 1989, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/III.21, Doc. 14, 31 August 1989, p. 15.
Habeas Corpus case
Habeas Corpus in Emergency Situations (Articles 27(2), 25(1) and 7(6) ACHR), Advisory Opinion OC-8/87 of 30 January 1987, Ser. A No. 8 (1987), IACtHR Annual Report 1987, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/III.17, Doc. 13, 30 August 1987, p. 17.
Judicial Guarantees case
Judicial Guarantees in States of Emergency (Articles 27(2), 25 and 8 ACHR), Advisory Opinion OC-9/87 of 6 October 1987, Ser. A No. 9 (1987), IACtHR Annual Report 1988, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/III.19, Doc. 13, 31 August 1988, p. 13.
Neira Alegría and Others case
Neira Alegría and Others v. Peru, Judgment of 19 January 1995, Series C No. 20 (1995), IACtHR Annual Report 1996, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/III.33, Doc. 4, 22 January 1996, p. 41.
Peruvian Prisons case (Provisional Measures)
Peruvian Prisons case, Provisional Measures Requested by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights regarding Peru, Order of 27 January 1993, IACtHR Annual Report 1993, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/III.29, Doc. 4, 10 January 1994, p. 21.
Street Children v. Guatemala
Street Children v. Guatemala, Judgment of 26 May 2001, Series C No. 77 (2001).
Suárez Rosero case
Suárez Rosero v. Ecuador, Judgment of 12 November 1997, Series C No. 35 (1997).
Velásquez Rodríguez case
Velásquez Rodríguez case, Judgment of 29 July 1988, Ser. C No. 4 (1988), IACtHR Annual Report 1988, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/III.19, Doc. 13, 31 August 1988, p. 35.
Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide case (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro)
– Provisional Measures
Case Concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)), Provisional Measures, Order of 8 April 1993, ICJ Reports 1993, p. 3.
– Preliminary Objections, Judgment
Case Concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)), Preliminary Objections, Judgment of 11 July 1996, ICJ Reports 1996, p. 595.
– Merits, Judgment
Case Concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), Merits, Judgment of 26 February 2007.
Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo case (DRC v. Uganda)
– Provisional Measures
Case Concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda), Request for Indication of Provisional Measures, Order of 1 July 2000, ICJ Reports 2000, p. 111.
– Judgment
Case Concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda), Judgment of 19 December 2005, ICJ Reports 2005, General List No. 116
– Judgment, Separate Opinion of Judge Simma
Case Concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda), Judgment of 19 December 2005, Separate Opinion of Judge Simma, ICJ Reports 2005, General List No. 116.
Arrest Warrant case
Case concerning the Arrest Warrant issued against the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Democratic Republic of the Congo by a Belgian Court (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium), Judgment of 14 February 2002, ICJ Reports 2002, p. 3.
Asylum case
Colombian-Peruvian Asylum case (Colombia v. Peru), Judgment of 20 November 1950, ICJ Reports 1950, p. 266.
Continental Shelf case (Tunisia v. Libya)
Case concerning the Continental Shelf (Tunisia v. Libyan Arab Jamahiriya), Judgment of 24 February 1982, ICJ Reports 1982, p. 18.
Continental Shelf case (Libya v. Malta)
Case concerning the Continental Shelf (Lybian Arab Jamahiriya v. Malta), Judgment of 3 June 1985, ICJ Reports 1985, p. 13.
Corfu Channel case (Merits)
The Corfu Channel case (the United Kingdom v. Albania), Merits, Judgment of 9 April 1949, ICJ Reports 1949, p. 4.
Fisheries case
Fisheries case (the United Kingdom v. Norway), Judgment of 18 December 1951, ICJ Reports 1951, p. 116.
Fisheries Jurisdiction case (FRG v. Iceland)
Fisheries Jurisdiction cases (Federal Republic of Germany v. Iceland), Merits, Judgment of 25 July 1974, ICJ Reports 1974, p. 175.
Fisheries Jurisdiction case (UK v. Iceland)
Fisheries Jurisdiction case (the United Kingdom v. Iceland), Merits, Judgment of 25 July 1974, ICJ Reports 1974, p. 3.
Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project case
Case concerning the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v. Slovakia), Judgment of 25 September 1997, ICJ Reports 1997, p. 7.
Legality of Use of Force cases
– Provisional Measures
Cases Concerning Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia v. Spain; Yugoslavia v. United States of America), Provisional Measures, Orders of 2 June 1999, ICJ Reports 1999, p. 761; p. 916.
– Preliminary Objections, Judgments
Cases Concerning Legality of Use of Force (Serbia and Montenegro v. Belgium; Serbia and Montenegro v. Canada; Serbia and Montenegro v. France; Serbia and Montenegro v. Germany; Serbia and Montenegro v. Italy; Serbia and Montenegro v. Netherlands; Serbia and Montenegro v. Portugal; Serbia and Montenegro v. United Kingdom), Preliminary Objections, Judgments of 15 December 2004, ICJ Reports 2004, p. 279; p. 429; p. 575; p. 720; p. 865; p. 1011; p. 1160; p. 1307.
Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory
Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports 2004, p. 136.
Namibia case
Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion of 21 June 1971, ICJ Reports 1971, p. 16.
Nicaragua case (Merits)
Case concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits, Judgment of 27 June 1986, ICJ Reports 1986, p. 14.
North Sea Continental Shelf cases
North Sea Continental Shelf cases (Federal Republic of Germany v. Denmark; Federal Republic of Germany v. the Netherlands), Judgment of 20 February 1969, ICJ Reports 1969, p. 3.
Nuclear Tests case (Request for an Examination of the Situation)
Request for an Examination of the Situation in Accordance with Paragraph 63 of the Court’s Judgment of 20 December 1974 in the Nuclear Tests case (New Zealand v. France), Order of 22 September 1995, ICJ Reports 1995, p. 288.
Nuclear Weapons case
Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion of 8 July 1996, ICJ Reports 1996, p. 226.
Nuclear Weapons (WHO) case
Legality of the Use by a state of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict, Advisory Opinion of 8 July 1996, ICJ Reports 1996, p. 66.
Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay case (Argentina v. Uruguay)
– Judgment
Case Concerning Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay), Judgment, ICJ Reports 2010, p. 14.
Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening)
Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening), Judgment of 3 February 2012, ICJ Reports 2012, p. 99.
Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal)
Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal), Judgment of 20 July 2012, ICJ Reports 2012, p. 422.
Abu Garda case
– Decision on the confirmation of charges
The Prosecutor v. Bahar Idriss Abu Garda, Decision on the confirmation of charges, Pre-Trial Chamber I, 8 February 2010, Case No. ICC-02/05-02/09.
Banda and Jerbo case
– Decision on the confirmation of charges
The Prosecutor v. Abdallah Banda Abakaer Nourain and Saleh Mohammed Jerbo Jamus, Corrigendum of the “Decision on the Confirmation of Charges”, Public Redacted Version, Pre-Trial Chamber I, 7 March 2011, Case No. ICC-02/05-03/09.
– Decision terminating the proceedings against Mr Jerbo
The Prosecutor v. Abdallah Banda Abakaer Nourain and Saleh Mohammed Jerbo Jamus, Public Redacted Decision Terminating the Proceedings Against Mr Jerbo, Trial Chamber IV, 4 October 2013, Case No. ICC-02/05-03/09.
Bemba case
– Decision on the confirmation of charges
The Prosecutor v. Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo, Decision on the confirmation of charges, Pre-Trial Chamber II, 15 June 2009, Case No. ICC-01/05-01/08.
Harun case
– Warrant of Arrest
The Prosecutor v. Ahmad Muhammad Harun (“Ahmad Harun”), Warrant of Arrest, Pre-Trial Chamber I, 27 April 2007, Case No. ICC-02/05-01/07-2-Corr.
Katanga case
Warrant of Arrest
The Prosecutor v. Germain Katanga, Warrant of Arrest, Pre-Trial Chamber I, 2 July 2007, case No. ICC-01/04-01/07.
– By decision of 10 March 2008, the cases against Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui were joined. The case was subsequently referred to as the Katanga and Chui case.
– By decision of 21 November 2012, the charges against Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui were severed. The cases are again referred to as Katanga case and Ngudjolo Chui case.
Katanga and Chui case
– By decision of 10 March 2008, the cases against Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui were joined. The case was subsequently referred to as the Katanga and Chui case.
– Decision on the confirmation of charges
The Prosecutor v. Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui, Decision on the confirmation of charges, Pre-Trial Chamber I, 30 September 2008, Case No. ICC-01/04-01/07.
– By decision of 21 November 2012, the charges against Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui were severed. The cases are again referred to as Katanga case and Ngudjolo Chui case.
Kony case
Warrant of Arrest
The Prosecutor v. Joseph Kony, Warrant of Arrest, 8 July 2005, as amended on 27 September 2005, Case No. ICC-02/04-01/05-53.
Kushayb case
– Warrant of Arrest
The Prosecutor v. Ali Muhammad Ali Abd-al-Rahman (“Ali Kushayb”), Warrant of Arrest, Pre-Trial Chamber I, 27 April 2007, Case No. ICC-02/05-01/07-3-Corr.
Lubanga case
– Warrant of Arrest
The Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Warrant of Arrest, Pre-Trial Chamber I, 10 February 2006, Case No. ICC-01/04-01/06.
– Decision on the confirmation of charges
The Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Decision on the confirmation of charges, Pre-Trial Chamber I, 29 January 2007, Case No. ICC-01/04-01/06.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 14 March 2012, Case No. ICC-01/04-01/06.
Mbarushimana case
– Decision on the confirmation of charges
The Prosecutor v. Callixte Mbarushimana, Decision on the Confirmation of Charges, Public Redacted Version, Pre-Trial Chamber I, 16 December 2011, Case No. ICC-01/04-01/10.
– Judgment on appeal
The Prosecutor v. Callixte Mbarushimana, Judgment on the Appeal of the Prosecutor against the Decision of Pre-Trial Chamber I of 16 December 2011 entitled “Decision on the confirmation of charges”, Public Document, Appeals Chamber, 30 May 2012, Case No. ICC-01/04-01/10 OA 4.
Ngudjolo Chui case
– Warrant of Arrest
The Prosecutor v. Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui, Warrant of Arrest, Pre-Trial Chamber I, 6 July 2007, Case No. ICC-01/04-02/07.
– By decision of 10 March 2008, the cases against Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui were joined. The case was subsequently referred to as the Katanga and Chui case.
– By decision of 21 November 2012, the charges against Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui were severed. The cases are again referred to as Katanga case and Ngudjolo Chui case.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Mathieu Ngudjolo, Judgment pursuant to Article 74 of the Statute, Public Document, Trial Chamber II, 18 December 2012, Case No. ICC-01/04-02/12.
Odhiambo case
The Prosecutor v. Okot Odhiambo, Warrant of Arrest, Pre-Trial Chamber II, 8 July 2005, Case No. ICC-02/04–01/05-56.
Ongwen case
– Warrant of Arrest
The Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen, Warrant of Arrest, Pre-Trial Chamber II, 8 July 2005, Case No. ICC-02/04-01/05-57.
Otti case
– Warrant of Arrest
The Prosecutor v. Vincent Otti, Warrant of Arrest, Pre-Trial Chamber II, 8 July 2005, Case No. ICC-02/04-01/05-54.
Akayesu case
Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Jean Paul Akayesu, Amended Indictment, 30 June 1997, Case No. ICTR-96-4-I.
Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Jean Paul Akayesu, Judgment, 2 September 1998, Case No. ICTR-96-4-T.
Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Jean Paul Akayesu, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 1 June 2001, Case No. ICTR-96-4.
Bagaragaza case
– Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Michel Bagaragaza, Amended Indictment, 1 December 2006, Case No. ICTR-05-86-I.
– Decision on Prosecutor’s Request for Referral of the Indictment to the Kingdom of the Netherlands
The Prosecutor v. Michel Bagaragaza, Decision on Prosecutor’s Request for Referral of the Indictment to the Kingdom of the Netherlands – Rule 11 bis of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, 13 April 2007, Case No. ICTR-05-86-11bis.
– Decision on Prosecutor’s Extremely Urgent Motion for Revocation of the Referral to the Kingdom of the Netherlands Pursuant to Rule 11 bis (F) & (G)
The Prosecutor v. Michel Bagaragaza, Decision on Prosecutor’s Extremely Urgent Motion for Revocation of the Referral to the Kingdom of the Netherlands Pursuant to Rule 11 bis (F) & (G), 17 August 2007, Case No. ICTR-05-86.
Bagilishema case
– Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Ignace Bagilishema, Amended Indictment, 17 September 1999, Case No. ICTR-95-1A-I.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Ignace Bagilishema, Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 7 June 2001, Case No. ICTR-95-1A-T.
– Judgment on Appeal (Reasons)
The Prosecutor v. Ignace Bagilishema, Judgment on Appeal (Reasons), Appeals Chamber, 3 July 2002, Case No. ICTR-95-1A-A.
Bagosora case
– Amended Indictment (Théoneste Bagosora)
The Prosecutor v. Théoneste Bagosora, Amended Indictment, 12 August 1999, Case No. ICTR-96-7-I.
– Amended Indictment (Anatole Nsengiyumva)
The Prosecutor v. Anatole Nsengiyumva, Amended Indictment, 12 August 1999, Case No. ICTR-96-12-I.
– Amended Indictment (Aloys Ntabakuze)
The Prosecutor v. Aloys Ntabakuze, Amended Indictment, 13 August 1999, Case No. ICTR-97-30-I.
– Amended Indictment (Gratien Kabiligi)
The Prosecutor v. Gratien Kabiligi, Amended Indictment, 13 August 1999, Case No. ICTR-97-34-I.
– Judgment and Sentence
The Prosecutor v. Théoneste Bagosora, Gratien Kabiligi, Aloys Ntabakuze and Anatole Nsengiyumva, Judgment and Sentence, Trial Chamber I, 18 December 2008, Case No. ICTR-98-41-T.
Bikindi case
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Simon Bikindi, Judgment, Trial Chamber III, 2 December 2008, Case No. ICTR-01-72-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Simon Bikindi, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 18 March 2010, Case No. ICTR-01-72-A.
Bisengimana case
– Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Paul Bisengimana, Indictment, 1 July 2000, Case No. ICTR-00-60-I.
– Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Paul Bisengimana, Amended Indictment, 23 November 2005, Case No. ICTR-60-I.
– Judgment and Sentence
The Prosecutor v. Paul Bisengimana, Judgment and Sentence, Trial Chamber II, 13 April 2006, Case No. ICTR-00-60-T.
Bizimana case
– Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Augustin Bizimana, Edouard Karemera, Callixte Nzabonimana, André Rwamakuba, Mathieu Ngirumpatse, Joseph Nzirorera, Félicien Kabuga, Amended Indictment Pursuant to the Decision of Trial Chamber II on the Defence Motion, Pursuant to Rule 72 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, Pertaining to, Inter Alia, Lack of Jurisdiction and Defects in the Form of the Indictment, 21 November 2001, Case No. ICTR-98-44-I.
Bizimungu case
– Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Casimir Bizimungu, Justin Mugenzi, Jérôme Bicamumpaka, Prosper Mugiraneza, Indictment, 7 May 1999, Case No. ICTR-99-50-I.
Gacumbitsi case
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Sylvestre Gacumbitsi, Judgment, Trial Chamber III, 17 June 2004, Case No. ICTR-01-64-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Sylvestre Gacumbitsi, Judgment on Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 7 July 2006, Case No. ICTR-01-64-A.
Imanishimwe case
– Judgment and Sentence
The Prosecutor v. André Ntagerura, Emmanuel Bagambiki, Samuel Imanishimwe, Judgment and Sentence, Trial Chamber III, 25 February 2004, Case No. ICTR-99-46-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. André Ntagerura, Emmanuel Bagambiki, Samuel Imanishimwe, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 7 July 2006, Case No. ICTR-99-46-A.
– Dissenting Opinion
The Prosecutor v. André Ntagerura, Emmanuel Bagambiki, Samuel Imanishimwe, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 7 July 2006, Case No. ICTR-99-46-A; Dissenting Opinion of Judge Wolfgang Schomburg.
Kajelijeli case
– Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Juvénal Kajelijeli, Amended Indictment, 25 January 2001, Case No. ICTR-98-44A-I.
– Decision on Motions for Partial Acquittal Pursuant to Rule 98 bis of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence
The Prosecutor v. Juvénal Kajelijeli, Decision on Motions for Partial Acquittal Pursuant to Rule 98 bis of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, Trial Chamber II, 13 September 2002, ICTR-98-44A-T.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Juvénal Kajelijeli, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 1 December 2003, ICTR-98-44A-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Juvénal Kajelijeli, Judgment on Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 23 May 2005, ICTR-98-44A-A.
Kalimanzira case
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Callixte Kalimanzira, Judgment, Trial Chamber III, 22 June 2009, Case No. ICTR-05-88-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Callixte Kalimanzira, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 20 October 2010, Case No. ICTR-05-88-A.
Kambanda case
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Jean Kambanda, Judgment on Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 19 October 2000, Case No. ICTR-97-23-A.
Kamuhanda case
– Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Jean de Dieu Kamuhanda, Indictment, 15 November 2000, Case No. ICTR-99-54A-I.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Jean de Dieu Kamuhanda, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 22 January 2004, Case No. ICTR-99-54A-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Jean de Dieu Kamuhanda, Judgment on Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 19 September 2005, Case No. ICTR-99-54A-A.
Kanyarukiga case
– Judgment and Sentence
The Prosecutor v. Gaspard Kanyarukiga, Judgment and Sentence, Trial Chamber II, 1 November 2010, Case No. ICTR-02-78-T.
Karemera case
– Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Édouard Karemera, Mathieu Ngirumpatse and Joseph Nzirorera, Amended Indictment, 24 August 2005, Case No. ICTR-98-44-I.
Karera case
– Judgment and Sentence
The Prosecutor v. François Karera, Judgment and Sentence, 7 December 2007, Case No. ICTR-01-74-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. François Karera, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 2 February 2009, Case No. ICTR-01-74-A.
Kayishema and Ruzindana case
– First Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Clément Kayishema and Obed Ruzindana, Decision on the Motion filed by the Prosecutor for Confirmation of the Trial Date and Submission of a Superseding Indictment, 10 April 1997, Case No. ICTR-95-1-I.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Clément Kayishema and Obed Ruzindana, Judgment, 21 May 1999, Case No. ICTR-95-1-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Clément Kayishema and Obed Ruzindana, Judgment (Reasons), Appeals Chamber, 1 June 2001, Case No. ICTR-95-1-A.
Mpambara case
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Jean Mpambara, Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 11 September 2006, Case No. ICTR-01-65-T.
Mpiranya case
Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Augustin Bizimungu, Augustin Ndindiliyimana, Protais Mpiranya, Francois-Xavier Nzuwonemeye, Innocent Sagahutu, Indictment, 25 September 2002, Case No. ICTR-00-56-I.
Muhimana case
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Mikaeli Muhimana, Judgment, Trial Chamber III, 28 April 2005, Case No. ICTR-95-1B-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Mikaeli Muhimana, Judgment on Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 21 May 2007, Case No. ICTR-95-1B-A.
– Partially Dissenting Opinion of Judge Schomburg
The Prosecutor v. Mikaeli Muhimana, Judgment on Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 21 May 2007, Case No. ICTR-95-1B-A, Partially Dissenting Opinion of Judge Schomburg on the Interpretation of the Right to be Informed.
Musema case
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Alfred Musema, Judgment, 27 January 2000, Case No. ICTR-96-13-I.
Muvunyi case
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Tharcisse Muvunyi, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 12 September 2006, Case No. ICTR-00-55A-T.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Tharcisse Muvunyi, Judgment, Trial Chamber III, 11 February 2010, Case No. ICTR-00-55A-T.
Nahimana case
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Ferdinand Nahimana, Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza and Hassan Ngeze, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 28 November 2007, Case No. ICTR-99-52-A.
Ndindabahizi case
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Emmanuel Ndindabahizi, Judgment and Sentence, Trial Chamber I, 15 July 2004, Case No. ICTR-01-71-I.
– Judgment on Appeal
Emmanuel Ndindabahizi v. the Prosecutor, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 16 January 2007, Case No. ICTR-01-71-A.
Ndindiliyimana case
– Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Augustin Bizimungu, Augustin Ndindiliyimana, François-Xavier Nzuwonemeye, Innocent Sagahutu, Amended Indictment (Joinder), 23 August 2004, Case No. ICTR-00-56-I.
Ngirabatware case
– Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Augustin Ngirabatware and Jean de Dieu Kamuhanda, Indictment, 27 September 1999, Case No. ICTR-99-54.
Niyitegeka case
– Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Eliézer Niyitegeka, Amended Indictment, 25 November 2002, Case No. ICTR-96-14-I.
– Judgment and Sentence
The Prosecutor v. Eliézer Niyitegeka, Judgment and Sentence, Trial Chamber I, 16 May 2003, Case No. ICTR-96-14-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Eliézer Niyitegeka, Judgment on Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 9 July 2004, Case No. ICTR-96-14-A.
Nsabimana and Nteziryayo case
– Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Sylvain Nsabimana and Alphonse Nteziryayo, Indictment, 18 October 1997, Case No. ICTR-97-29-I.
Ntaganzwa case
– Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Ladislas Ntaganzwa, Amended Indictment, 1 December 1998, Case No. ICTR-96-9-I.
Ntakirutimana case
– Amended Indictment (Bisesero)
The Prosecutor v. Elizaphan Ntakirutimana and Gérard Ntakirutimana, Amended Indictment, 7 July 1998, Case No. ICTR-96-17-I.
– Indictment (Mugonero)
The Prosecutor v. Elizaphan Ntakirutimana, Gérard Ntakirutimana and Charles Sikubwabo, Indictment (Amended pursuant to the order of 5 October 2000), 20 October 2000, Case No. ICTR-96-10-I.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Elizaphan Ntakirutimana and Gérard Ntakirutimana, Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 21 February 2003, Cases Nos. ICTR-96-10-T & ICTR-96-17-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Elizaphan Ntakirutimana and Gérard Ntakirutimana, Judgment on Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 13 December 2004, Cases Nos. ICTR-96-10-A & ICTR-96-17-A.
Ntawukulilyayo case
– Judgment and Sentence
The Prosecutor v. Dominique Ntawukulilyayo, Judgment and Sentence, Trial Chamber III, 3 August 2010, Case No. ICTR-05-82-T.
Ntuyahaga case
– Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Bernard Ntuyahaga, Indictment, 26 September 1998, Case No. ICTR-98-40-I.
– Decision on the Review of the Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Bernard Ntuyahaga, Decision on the Review of the Indictment, 29 September 1998, Case No. ICTR-98-40-I.
– Decision on the Prosecutor’s Motion to Withdraw the Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Bernard Ntuyahaga, Decision on the Prosecutor’s Motion to Withdraw the Indictment, 18 March 1999, Case No. ICTR-98-40-I.
Nyiramasuhuko case
– Amended Indictment (Pauline Nyiramasuhuko and Arsène Shalom Ntahobali)
The Prosecutor v. Pauline Nyiramasuhuko and Arsène Shalom Ntahobali, Amended Indictment as per the decision of the Trial Chamber II of 10 August 1999, 1 March 2001, Case No. ICTR-97-21-I.
– Amended Indictment (Elie Ndayambaje)
The Prosecutor v. Elie Ndayambaje, Amended Indictment as per the decision of Trial Chamber II of 10 August 1999, 11 August 1999, Case No. ICTR-96-8-I.
– Amended Indictment (Sylvain Nsabimana and Alphonse Nteziryayo)
The Prosecutor v. Sylvain Nsabimana and Alphonse Nteziryayo, Amended Indictment as per the decision of Trial Chamber II of 12 August 1999, 12 August 1999, Case No. ICTR-97-29-I.
– Amended Indictment (Joseph Kanyabashi)
The Prosecutor v. Joseph Kanyabashi, Amended Indictment as per the decision of Trial Chamber II of 12 August 1999 and 31 May 2000, 2 November 2000, Case No. ICTR-96-15-I.
Nzabirinda case
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Joseph Nzabirinda, Sentencing Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 23 February 2007, Case No. ICTR-01-77-T.
Rusatira case
– Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Léonidas Rusatira, Indictment, 21 February 2001, Case No. ICTR-02-80-I.
– Decisions on the Prosecutor’s Ex Parte Application for Leave to Withdraw the Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Léonidas Rusatira, Decisions on the Prosecutor’s Ex Parte Application for Leave to Withdraw the Indictment, 14 August 2002, Case No. ICTR-02-80-I.
Rutaganda case
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Georges Anderson Nderubumwe Rutaganda, Judgment, 6 December 1999, Case No. ICTR-96-3-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
Georges Rutaganda v. the Prosecutor, Judgment on Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 26 May 2003, Case No. ICTR-96-3-A.
Rutaganira case
– First Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Clément Kayishema, Ignace Bagilishema, Charles Sikubwabo, Aloys Ndimbati, Vincent Rutaganira, Mika Muhimana, Ryandikayo, Obed Ruzindana, First Amended Indictment, 29 April 1996, Case No. ICTR-95-1-I.
– Judgment and Sentence
The Prosecutor v. Vincent Rutaganira, Judgment and Sentence, Trial Chamber III, 14 March 2005, Case No. ICTR-95-1C-T.
– Decision on Appeal of a Decision of the President on Early Release
The Prosecutor v. Vincent Rutaganira, Decision on Appeal of a Decision of the President on Early Release, Appeals Chamber, 24 August 2006, Case No. ICTR-95-1C-AR.
Rwamakuba case
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. André Rwamakuba, Sentence and Judgment, Trial Chamber III, 20 September 2006, Case No. ICTR-98-44C-T.
Semanza case
– Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Laurent Semanza, Indictment, 21 October 1997, Case No. ICTR-97-20-I.
– Third Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Laurent Semanza, Third Amended Indictment, 12 October 1999, Case No. ICTR-97-20-I.
– Decision on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Laurent Semanza, Decision on Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 31 May 2000, Case No. ICTR-97-20-A.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Laurent Semanza, Judgment, Trial Chamber III, 15 May 2003, Case No. ICTR-97-20-T.
– Separate Opinion
The Prosecutor v. Laurent Semanza, Separate Opinion of Judge Yakov Ostrovsky, Trial Chamber III, 15 May 2003, Case No. ICTR-97-20-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Laurent Semanza, Judgment on Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 20 May 2005, Case No. ICTR-97-20-A.
Seromba case
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Athanase Seromba, Judgment, Trial Chamber III, 13 December 2006, Case No. ICTR-01-66.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Athanase Seromba, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 12 March 2008, Case No. ICTR-01-66-A.
Setako case
– Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Éphrem Setako, Indictment, 22 March 2004, Case No. ICTR-04-81-I.
Sikubwabo case
– First Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Clément Kayishema, Ignace Bagilishema, Charles Sikubwabo, Aloys Ndimbati, Vincent Rutaganira, Mika Muhimana, Ryandikayo, Obed Ruzindana, First Amended Indictment, 29 April 1996, Case No. ICTR-95-1-I.
Simba case
– Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Aloys Simba, Amended Indictment, 10 May 2004, Case No. ICTR-01-76-I.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Aloys Simba, Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 13 December 2005, Case No. ICTR-01-76-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Aloys Simba, Judgment on Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 27 November 2007, Case No. ICTR-01-76-A.
Ademi and Norac case
– Consolidated Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Rahim Ademi and Mirko Norac, Consolidated Indictment, 27 May 2004, Case No. IT-01-46 & IT-04-76.
Aleksovski case
–Judgment:
The Prosecutor v. Zlatko Aleksovski, Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 25 June 1999, Case No. IT-95-14/1-T.
–Judgment on Appeal:
The Prosecutor v. Zlatko Aleksovski, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 24 March 2000, Case No. IT-95-14/1-A.
Babić case
– Initial Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Milan Babić, Initial Indictment, 17 November 2003, Case No. IT-03-72.
– Sentencing Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Milan Babić, Sentencing Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 29 June 2004, Case No. IT-03-72-S.
– Judgment on Sentencing Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Milan Babić, Judgment on Sentencing Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 18 July 2005, Case No. IT-03-72-A.
Banović case
– Consolidated Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Predrag Banović, Consolidated Indictment, 21 November 2002, Case No. IT-02-65.
– Sentencing Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Predrag Banović, Sentencing Judgment, Trial Chamber III, 28 October 2003, Case No. IT-02-65/1-S.
Beara case
Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Ljubiša Beara, Amended Indictment, 30 March 2005, Case No. IT-02-58-PT.
Beqa Beqaj case
– Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Beqa Beqai, Amended Indictment, 8 November 2004, Case No. IT-03-66-R77.
– Judgment on Contempt Allegations
The Prosecutor v. Beqa Beqai, Judgment on Contempt Allegations, Trial Chamber I, 27 May 2005, Case No. IT-03-66-T-R77.
Blagojević and Jokić case
– Amended Joinder Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Vidoje Blagojević and Dragan Jokić, Amended Joinder Indictment, 26 May 2003, Case Number IT-02-60-T.
– Judgment on Motions for Acquittal Pursuant to Rule 98 Bis
The Prosecutor v. Vidoje Blagojević and Dragan Jokić, Judgment on Motions for Acquittal Pursuant to Rule 98 Bis, Trial Chamber I, Section A, 5 April 2004, Case No. IT-02-60-T.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Vidoje Blagojević and Dragan Jokić, Judgment, Trial Chamber I, Section A, 17 January 2005, Case No. IT-02-60-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Vidoje Blagojević and Dragan Jokić, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 9 May 2007, IT-02-60-A.
Blaškić case
– Decision on Defence Motion
The Prosecutor v. Tihomir Blaškić, Decision on Defence Motion to Strike Portions of the Amended Indictment Alleging “Failure to Punish” Liability, Trial Chamber, 4 April 1997, Case No. IT-95-14-PT.
– Second Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Tihomir Blaškić, Second Amended Indictment, 25 April 1997, Case No. IT-95-14-AI.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Tihomir Blaškić, Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 3 March 2000, Case No. IT-95-14-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Tihomir Blaškić, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 29 July 2004, Case No. IT-95-14-A.
Boškoski and Tarčulovski case
Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Ljube Boškoski and Johan Tarčulovski, Amended Indictment, 2 November 2005, Case No. IT-04-82-PT.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Ljube Boškoski and Johan Tarčulovski, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 10 July 2008, Case No. IT-04-82-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Ljube Boškoski and Johan Tarčulovski, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 19 May 2010, Case No. IT-04-82-A.
Bralo case
– Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Miroslav Bralo aka “Cicko”, Amended Indictment, 19 July 2005, Case No. IT-95-17-PT.
– Sentencing Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Miroslav Bralo, Sentencing Judgment, Trial Chamber III, 7 December 2005, Case No. IT-95-17-S.
– Judgment on Sentencing Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Miroslav Bralo, Judgment on Sentencing Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 2 April 2007, Case No. IT-95-17-A.
Brđanin case
– Rule 98bis Decision
The Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Decision on Motion for Acquittal Pursuant to Rule 98bis, Trial Chamber, 28 November 2003, Case No. IT-99-36-T.
– Sixth Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Sixth Amended Indictment, 9 December 2003, Case No. IT-99-36-T.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 1 September 2004, Case No. IT-99-36-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Judgment on Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 3 April 2007, Case No. IT-99-36-A.
Čermak and Markač case
Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Ivan Čermak and Mladen Markač, Amended Indictment, 14 December 2005, Case No. IT-03-73-PT.
Češić case
– Third Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Ranko Češić, Third Amended Indictment, Case No. 26 November 2002, IT-95-10/1-PT.
Sentencing Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Ranko Češić, Sentencing Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 11 March 2004, Case No. IT-95-12-S.
Delić case
Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Rasim Delić, Amended Indictment, 14 July 2006, Case No. IT-04-83-PT.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Rasim Delić, Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 15 September 2008, Case No. IT-04-83-T.
Dokmanović case
The Prosecutor v. Slavko Dokmanović, Prosecutor’s Response to the Trial Chamber’s Request for a Brief on the use of cumulative criminal charges in relation to a proposed “substantive” ne bis in idem principle in international criminal law, 21 July 1997, Case No. IT-95-13a-T.
Đorđević case
– Redacted Third Amended Joinder Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Vlastimir Đorđević, Redacted Third Amended Joinder Indictment, 26 June 2006, Case No. IT-05-87/1-PT.
Dragomir Miloševic case
Prosecution’s Submission of Amended Indictment Pursuant to Rule 50 and Trial Chamber’s Decision dated 12 December 2006
The Prosecutor v. Dragomir Miloševic, Prosecution's Submission of Amended Indictment Pursuant to Rule 50 and Trial Chamber's Decision dated 12 December 2006, 18 December 2006, Case No. IT-98-2911-PT.
– Judgment
Prosecutor v. Dragomir Milošević, Judgment, Trial Chamber III, 12 December 2007, Case No. IT-98-29/1-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
Prosecutor v. Dragomir Milošević, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 12 November 2009, Case No. IT-98-29/1-A.
Dukić case
The Prosecutor v. Ðorde Dukić, Indictment, 29 February 1996, Case No. IT-96-20-I. Erdemović case
Sentencing Judgment:
The Prosecutor v. Dražen Erdemović, Sentencing Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 29 November 1996, Case No. IT-96-22-T.
Judgment on Appeal:
The Prosecutor v. Dražen Erdemović, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 7 October 1997, Case No. IT-96-22-A.
Sentencing Judgment bis:
The Prosecutor v. Dražen Erdemović, Sentencing Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 5 March 1998, Case No. IT-96-22-Tbis.
Furundžija case
Judgment:
The Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 10 December 1998, Case No. IT-95-17/1-T.
Judgment on Appeal:
The Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 21 July 2000, Case No. IT-95-17/1-A.
Galić case
– Initial Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Stanislav Galić and Dragomir Milošević, Initial Indictment, 24 April 1998, Case No. IT-98-29-I.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Stanislav Galić, Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 5 December 2003, Case No. IT-98-29-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Stanislav Galić, Judgment on Appeal, 30 November 2006, Case No. 98-29-A.
– Partially Dissenting Opinion of Judge Pocar
The Prosecutor v. Stanislav Galić, Judgment on Appeal, 30 November 2006, Case No. 98-29-A, Partially Dissenting Opinion of Judge Pocar.
– Separate and Partially Dissenting Opinion of Judge Schomburg
The Prosecutor v. Stanislav Galić, Judgment on Appeal, 30 November 2006, Case No. 98-29-A, Separate and Partially Dissenting Opinion of Judge Schomburg.
Gotovina case
– Joinder Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Ante Gotovina, Ivan Čermak and Mladen Markač, Joinder Indictment, 6 March 2007, Case No. IT-06-90-PT.
Hadžić case
– Initial Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Goran Hadžić, Initial Indictment, 21 May 2004, Case No. IT-04-75-I.
Hadžihasanović case
– Initial Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Enver Hadžihasanović, Mehmed Alagić and Amir Kubura, Initial Indictment, 13 July 2001 (kept confidential until its unsealing on 2 August 2001), Case No. IT-01-47.
– Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Enver Hadžihasanović, Mehmed Alagić and Amir Kubura, Amended Indictment, 11 January 2002, Case No. IT-01-47-PT.
– Decision on Joint Challenge to Jurisdiction
The Prosecutor v. Enver Hadžihasanović, Mehmed Alagić and Amir Kubura, Decision on Joint Challenge to Jurisdiction, 12 November 2002, Case No. IT-01-47-PT.
– Decision on Interlocutory Appeal Challenging Jurisdiction in Relation to Command Responsibility
The Prosecutor v. Enver Hadžihasanović, Mehmed Alagić and Amir Kubura, Decision on Interlocutory Appeal Challenging Jurisdiction in Relation to Command Responsibility, Appeals Chamber, 16 July 2003, Case No. IT-01-47-AR72.
– Separate and Partially Dissenting Opinion of Judge David Hunt – Command Responsibility Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Enver Hadžihasanović, Mehmed Alagić and Amir Kubura, Decision on Interlocutory Appeal Challenging Jurisdiction in Relation to Command Responsibility, Appeals Chamber, 16 July 2003, Case No. IT-01-47-AR72, Separate and Partially Dissenting Opinion of Judge David Hunt – Command Responsibility Appeal.
– Partial Dissenting Opinion of Judge Shahabuddeen
The Prosecutor v. Enver Hadžihasanović, Mehmed Alagić and Amir Kubura, Decision on Interlocutory Appeal Challenging Jurisdiction in Relation to Command Responsibility, Appeals Chamber, 16 July 2003, Case No. IT-01-47-AR72, Partial Dissenting Opinion of Judge Shahabuddeen.
– Third Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Enver Hadžihasanović and Amir Kubura, Third Amended Indictment, 26 September 2003, Case No. IT-01-47-PT.
– Submission of the Prosecution’s Pre-Trial Brief Pursuant to Rule 65 ter (E)
The Prosecutor v. Enver Hadžihasanović and Amir Kubura, Submission of the Prosecution’s Pre-Trial Brief Pursuant to Rule 65 ter (E), 10 October 2003, Case No. IT-01-47-PT.
– Decision on Motions for Acquittal Pursuant to Rule 98 bis of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence
The Prosecutor v. Enver Hadžihasanović and Amir Kubura, Decision on Motions for Acquittal Pursuant to Rule 98 bis of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, Trial Chamber II, 27 September 2004, Case No. IT-01-47-T.
– Decision on Joint Defence Interlocutory Appeal of Trial Chamber Decision on Rule 98 bis Motions for Acquittal
The Prosecutor v. Enver Hadžihasanović and Amir Kubura, Decision on Joint Defence Interlocutory Appeal of Trial Chamber Decision on Rule 98 bis Motions for Acquittal, Appeals Chamber, 11 March 2005, Case No. IT-01-47-AR73.3.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Enver Hadžihasanović and Amir Kubura, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 15 March 2006, Case No. IT-01-47-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Enver Hadžihasanović and Amir Kubura, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 22 April 2008, Case No. IT-01-47-A.
Haradinaj case
– Third Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Ramush Haradinaj, Idriz Balaj and Lahi Brahimaj, Third Amended Indictment, 7 September 2007, Case No. IT-04-84-T.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Ramush Haradinaj, Idriz Balaj and Lahi Brahimaj, Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 3 April 2008, Case No. IT-04-84-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Ramush Haradinaj, Idriz Balaj and Lahi Brahimaj, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 19 July 2010, Case No. IT-04-84-A.
Jelisić case
Initial Indictment:
The Prosecutor v. Goran Jelisić aka Adolf and Ranko Cešic, Indictment, 21 July 1995, Case No. IT-95-10-I.
Judgment:
The Prosecutor v. Goran Jelisić, Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 14 December 1999, Case No. IT-95-10-T.
Karadžić and Mladić case
First Indictment:
The Prosecutor v. Radovan Karadžić and Ratko Mladić, Indictment, 24 July 1995, Case No. IT-95-5-I.
Second Indictment:
The Prosecutor v. Radovan Karadžić and Ratko Mladić, Indictment, 16 November 1995, Case No. IT-95-18-I.
Review of the Indictments:
The Prosecutor v. Radovan Karadžić and Ratko Mladić, Review of the Indictments Pursuant to Rule 61 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, 11 July 1996, Cases No. IT-95-5-R61 and IT-95-18-R61.
Kordić and Čerkez case
Initial Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Dario Kordić, Tihofil aka Tihomir Blaškić, Mario Čerkez, Ivan aka Ivica Šantic, Pero Skopljak and Zlatko Aleksovski, Indictment, 10 November 1995, Case No. IT-95-14/2-I.
First Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Dario Kordić and Mario Čerkez, Amended Indictment, 30 September 1998, Case No. IT-95-14/2-AI.
Decision on the Joint Defence Motion
The Prosecutor v. Dario Kordić and Mario Čerkez, Decision on the Joint Defence Motion to Dismiss the Amended Indictment for Lack of Jurisdiction Based on the Limited Jurisdictional Reach of Articles 2 and 3, 2 March 1999, Case No. IT-95-14/2-AI.
Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Dario Kordić and Mario Čerkez, Judgment, Trial Chamber III, 26 February 2001, Case No. IT-95-14/2-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Dario Kordić and Mario Čerkez, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 17 December 2004, Case No. IT-95-14/2-A.
Krajišnik case
– Amended Consolidated Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Momčilo Krajišnik and Biljana Plavšić, Amended Consolidated Indictment, 7 March 2002, Case No. IT-00-39&40-PT.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Momčilo Krajišnik, Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 27 September 2006, Case No. IT-00-39-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Momčilo Krajišnik, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 17 March 2009, Case No. IT-00-39-A.
Krnojelac case
Initial Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Milorad Krnojelac, aka “Mićo”, Indictment, 17 June 1997, Case No. IT-97-25-I.
Third Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Milorad Krnojelac, Third Amended Indictment, 25 June 2001, Case no. IT-97-25.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Milorad Krnojelac, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 15 March 2002, Case No. IT-97-25-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Milorad Krnojelac, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 17 September 2003, Case No. IT-97-25-A.
Krstić case
– Initial Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Radislav Krstić, Indictment, 2 November 1998, Case No. IT-98-33-I.
– Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Radislav Krstić, Amended Indictment, 27 October 1999, Case No. IT-98-33.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Radislav Krstić, Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 2 August 2001, Case No. IT-98-33-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Radislav Krstić, Judgment on Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 19 April 2004, Case No. IT-98-33-A.
Kunarac case
Initial Indictment:
The Prosecutor v. Dragan Gagović, Gojko Janković, Janko Janjić, Radomir Kovač, Zoran Vuković, Dragan Zelenović, Dragoljub Kunarac, Radovan Stanković, Indictment, 26 June 1996, Case No. IT-96-23/2-I..
Judgment:
The Prosecutor v. Dragoljub Kunarac, Radomir Kovač and Zoran Vuković, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 22 February 2001, Case Nos. IT-96-23-T and IT-96-23/1-T.
Kupreškić case
– First Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Zoran Kupreškić, Mirjan Kupreškić, Vlatko Kupreškić, Drago Josipović, Dragan Papić, Vladimir Šantić aka “Vlado”, Amended Indictment, Trial Chamber II, 9 February 1998, Case No. IT-95-16-AI.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Zoran Kupreškić, Mirjan Kupreškić, Vlatko Kupreškić, Drago Josipović, Dragan Papić, Vladimir Šantić aka “Vlado”, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 14 January 2000, Case No. IT-95-16-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Zoran Kupreškić, Mirjan Kupreškić, Vlatko Kupreškić, Drago Josipović, Vladimir Šantić, Judgment on Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 23 October 2001, Case No. IT-95-16-A.
Kvočka case
– First Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Miroslav Kvočka, Milojica Kos, Mladen Radić, Zoran Žigić, Amended Indictment, 12 June 1998, Case No. IT-98-30/1-AI.
– Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Miroslav Kvočka, Milojica Kos, Mladen Radić, Zoran Žigić, Dragoljub Prcac, Amended Indictment, 21 August 2000, Case No. IT-98-30.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Miroslav Kvočka, Milojica Kos, Mladen Radić, Zoran Žigić, Dragoljub Prcac, Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 2 November 2001, Case No. IT-98-30/1-T.
Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Miroslav Kvočka, Milojica Kos, Mladen Radić, Zoran Žigić, Dragoljub Prcac, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 28 February 2005, Case No. IT-98-30/1-A.
Limaj case
Second Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Fatmir Limaj, Haradin Bala,and Isak Musliu, Second Amended Indictment, 6 November 2003, Case No. IT-03-66-PT.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Fatmir Limaj, Haradin Bala and Isak Musliu, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 30 November 2005, Case No.: IT-03-66-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Fatmir Limaj, Haradin Bala and Isak Musliu, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 16 November 2007, Case No.: IT-03-66-A.
Lukić and Lukić case
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Milan Lukić and Sredoje Lukić, Judgment, Trial Chamber III, 20 July 2009, Case No. IT-98-32/1-T.
Martić case
The Prosecutor v. Milan Martić, Review of the Indictment Pursuant to Rule 61 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, Trial Chamber I, 8 March 1996, Case No. IT-95-11-R61.
Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Milan Martić, Amended Indictment, 14 July 2003, Case No. IT-95-11.– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Milan Martić, Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 12 June 2007, Case No. IT-95-11-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Milan Martić, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 8 October 2008, Case No. IT-95-11-A.
Mičo Stanišič case
– Revised Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Mičo Stanišič, Revised Amended Indictment, 22 September 2005, Case No. IT-04-79-PT.
Milutinović case
– Redacted Third Amended Joinder Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Milan Milutinović, Nikola Šainović, Dragoljub Ojdanić, Nebojša Pavković, Vladimir Lazarević, Sreten Lukić, Redacted Third Amended Joinder Indictment, 26 June 2006, Case No. IT-05-87-PT.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Milan Milutinović, Nikola Šainović, Dragoljub Ojdanić, Nebojša Pavković, Vladimir Lazarević, Sreten Lukić, Judgment, Trial Chamber, 26 February 2009, Case No. IT-05-87-T.
Miodrag Jokić case
– Second Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Miodrag Jokić, Second Amended Indictment, 27 August 2003, Case No. IT-01-42.
– Sentencing Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Miodrag Jokić, Sentencing Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 18 March 2004, Case No. IT-01-42/1-S.
– Judgment on Sentencing Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Miodrag Jokić, Judgment on Sentencing Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 30 August 2005, Case No. IT-01-42/1-A.
Momir Nikolić case
– Amended Joinder Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Vidoje Blagojević, Dragan Obrenović, Dragan Jokić, Momir Nikolić, Amended Joinder Indictment, 27 May 2002, Case No. IT-02-60-PT.
– Sentencing Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Momir Nikolić, Sentencing Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 2 December 2003, Case No. IT-02-60/1-S.
– Judgment on Sentencing Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Momir Nikolić, Judgment on Sentencing Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 8 March 2006, Case No. IT-02-60/1-A.
Mrđa case
Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Darko Mrđa, Amended Indictment, 4 August 2003, Case No. IT-02-59-S.
– Sentencing Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Darko Mrđa, Sentencing Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 31 March 2004, Case No. IT-02-59-S.
Mrkšić case
– Initial Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Mile Mrkšić, Miroslav Radić, and Veselin Šljivančanin, Indictment, 26 October 1995, Case No. IT-95-13a-I.
– Review of the Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Mile Mrkšić, Miroslav Radić, Veselin Šljivančanin and Slavko Dokmanović, Review of the Indictment Pursuant to Rule 61 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, Trial Chamber I, 3 April 1996, Case No. IT-95-13-R61.
– Third Consolidated Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Mile Mrkšić, Miroslav Radić and Veselin Šljivančanin, Third Consolidated Amended Indictment, 15 November 2004, Case No. IT-95-13/1-PT.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Mile Mrkšić, Miroslav Radić and Veselin Šljivančanin, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 27 September 2007, Case No. IT-95-13/1-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v Mile Mrkšić and Veselin Šljivančanin, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 5 May 2009, Case No. IT-95-13/1-A.
Mucić case
– Initial Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Zejnil Delalić, Zdravko Mucić, aka “Pavo”, Hazim Delić, Esad Landžo, aka “Zenga”, Indictment, 21 March 1996, Case No. IT-96-21-I.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Zejnil Delalić, Zdravko Mucić, aka “Pavo”, Hazim Delić, Esad Landžo, aka “Zenga”, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 16 November 1998, Case No. IT-96-21-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Zejnil Delalić, Zdravko Mucić, aka “Pavo”, Hazim Delić, Esad Landžo, aka “Zenga”, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 20 February 2001, Case No. IT-96-21-A.
– Judgment on Sentence Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Zdravko Mucić, Hazim Delić, and Esad Landžo, Judgment on Sentence Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 8 April 2003, Case: IT-96-21-Abis.
Naletilić and Martinović case
– Second Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Mladen Naletilić aka “Tuta” and Vinko Martinović aka “Stela”, Second Amended Indictment, 16 October 2001, Case No. IT-98-34-PT.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Mladen Naletilić aka as “Tuta” and Vinko Martinović aka as “Stela”, Judgment, Trial Chamber, 31 March 2003, Case No. IT-98-34-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Mladen Naletilić aka “Tuta” and Vinko Martinović aka “Stela”, Judgment on Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 3 May 2006, Case No. IT-98-34-A.
Nikolić case
Initial Indictment The Prosecutor v. Dragan Nikolić aka “Jenki” Nikolić, Indictment, 4 November 1994, Case No. IT-94-2-I.
Review of the Indictment:
The Prosecutor v. Dragan Nikolić, Review of the Indictment Pursuant to Rule 61 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, Trial Chamber II, 20 October 1995, Case No. IT-94-2-R61.
Obrenović case
– Amended Joinder Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Vidoje Blagojević, Dragan Obrenović, Dragan Jokić, Momir Nikolić, Amended Joinder Indictment, 27 May 2002, Case No. IT-02-60-PT.
– Sentencing Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Dragan Obrenović, Sentencing Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 10 December 2003, Case No. IT-02-60/2-S.
Orić case
– Third Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Naser Orić, Third Amended Indictment, 30 June 2005, Case No. IT-03-68-PT.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Naser Orić, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 30 June 2006, Case No. IT-03-68-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Naser Orić, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 3 July 2008, Case No. IT-03-68-A.
Perišić case
– Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Momčilo Perišić, Amended Indictment, 26 September 2005, Case No. IT-04-81-PT.
Plavšić case
– Amended Consolidated Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Momčilo Krajišnik and Biljana Plavšić, Amended Consolidated Indictment, 7 March 2002, Case No. IT-00-39&40-PT.
– Sentencing Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Biljana Plavšić, Sentencing Judgment, Trial Chamber III, 27 February 2003, Case No. IT-00-39&40/1-S.
Popović case
– Second Consolidated Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Vujadin Popović, Ljubiša Beara, Drago Nikolić, Ljubomir Borovčanin, Radivoje Miletić, Milan Gvero and Vinko Pandurević, Second Consolidated Amended Indictment, 14 June 2006, Case No. IT-05-88-PT.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Vujadin Popović, Ljubiša Beara, Drago Nikolić, Ljubomir Borovčanin, Radivoje Miletić, Milan Gvero and Vinko Pandurević, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 10 June 2010, Case No. IT-05-88-T.
Prlić case
Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Jadranko Prlić, Bruno Stojić, Slobodan Praljak, Milivoj Petković, Valentin Ćorić, and Berislav Pušić, Amended Indictment, 16 November 2005, Case No. IT-04-74-PT.
Rajić case
– Initial Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Ivica Rajić aka Viktor Andrić, Indictment, 23 August 1995, Case No. IT-95-12-I.
– Review of the Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Ivica Rajić aka Viktor Andrić, Review of the Indictment Pursuant to Rule 61 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, 13 September 1996, Case No. IT-95-12-R61.
– Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Ivica Rajić aka “Viktor Andrić”, Amended Indictment, 14 January 2004, Case No. IT-95-12-PT.
– Sentencing Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Ivica Rajić, a.k.a. “Viktor Andrić”, Sentencing Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 8 May 2006, Case No. IT-95-12-S.
Raševič case
– Second Joint Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Mitar Rašević and Savo Todović, Second Joint Amended Indictment, 24 March 2006, Case No. IT-97-25/1-PT.
Sefer Halilović case
– Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Sefer Halilović, Indictment, 12 September 2001, Case No. IT-01-48-I.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Sefer Halilović, Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 16 November 2005, Case No. IT-01-48-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Sefer Halilović, Judgment on Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 16 October 2007, Case No. IT-01-48-A.
Simić case
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Blagoje Simić, Miroslav Tadić and Simo Zarić, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 17 October 2003, Case No. IT-95-9-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Blagoje Simić, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 28 November 2006, Case No. IT-95-9-A.
Slobodan Milošević case
– Second Amended Indictment (Kosovo)
The Prosecutor v. Slobodan Milošević, Amended Indictment, 16 October 2001, Case No. IT-99-37-PT.
– First Amended Indictment (Croatia)
The Prosecutor v. Slobodan Milošević, Second Amended Indictment, 23 October 2002, Case No. IT-02-54-T.
– Amended Indictment (Bosnia and Herzegovina)
The Prosecutor v. Slobodan Milošević, Amended Indictment, 22 November 2002, Case No. IT-02-54-T.
– Decision on Preliminary Motions
The Prosecutor v. Slobodan Milošević, Decision on Preliminary Motions, Trial Chamber, 8 November 2001, Case No. IT-02-54.
– Decision on Provisional Protective Measures Pursuant to Rule 69
The Prosecutor v. Slobodan Milošević, Decision on Prosecution Motion for Provisional Protective Measures Pursuant to Rule 69, Trial Chamber, 19 February 2002, Case No. IT-02-54.
– Decision on Trial Related Protection Measures for Witnesses (Croatia)
The Prosecutor v. Slobodan Milošević, Decision on Prosecution Motion for Trial Related Protection Measures for Witnesses (Croatia), Trial Chamber, 30 July 2002, Case No. IT-02-54.
– Decision on Trial Related Protection Measures for Witnesses (Bosnia)
Decision on Prosecution Motion for Trial Related Protection Measures for Witnesses (Bosnia), 30 July 2002, Trial Chamber, Case No. IT-02-54.
– Reasons for Decision on the Prosecution Motion Concerning Assignment of Counsel
The Prosecutor v. Slobodan Milošević, Reasons for Decision on the Prosecution Motion Concerning Assignment of Counsel, Trial Chamber, 4 April 2003, Case No. IT-02-54.
– Decision on the Interlocutory Appeal by the Amici Curiae against the Trial Chamber Order Concerning the Presentation and Preparation of the Defence Case
The Prosecutor v. Slobodan Milošević, Decision on the Interlocutory Appeal by the Amici Curiae against the Trial Chamber Order Concerning the Presentation and Preparation of the Defence Case, Appeals Chamber, 20 January 2004, Case No. IT-02-54-AR73.6.
– Rule 98bis Decision
The Prosecutor v. Slobodan Milošević, Decision on Motion for Judgment of Acquittal, Trial Chamber, 16 June 2004, Case No. IT-02-54-T.
– Reasons for Decision on Assignment of Defence Counsel
The Prosecutor v. Slobodan Milošević, Reasons for Decision on Assignment of Defence Counsel, Trial Chamber, 22 September 2004, Case No. IT-02-54-T.
– Decision on Interlocutory Appeal of the Trial Chamber’s Decision on the Assignment of Defense Counsel
The Prosecutor v. Slobodan Milošević, Decision on Interlocutory Appeal of the Trial Chamber’s Decision on the Assignment of Defense Counsel, Appeals Chamber, 1 November 2004, Case No. IT-02-54-AR73.7.
– Decision in Relation to Severance, Extension of Time and Rest
The Prosecutor v. Slobodan Milošević, Decision in Relation to Severance, Extension of Time and Rest, Trial Chamber, 12 December 2005, Case No. IT-02-54-T.
Stakić case
– Fourth Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Milomir Stakić, Fourth Amended Indictment, 10 April 2002, Case No. IT-97-24-PT.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Milomir Stakić, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 31 July 2003, Case No. IT-97-24-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Milomir Stakić, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 22 March 2006, Case No. IT-97-24-A.
Stanišič and Simatovič case
– Revised Second Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Jovica Stanišič and Franko Simatovič, Revised Second Amended Indictment, 15 May 2006, Case No. IT-03-69-PT.
Stanković case
Third Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Radovan Stanković, Third Amended Indictment, 8 December 2003, Case No.: IT-96-23/2-I.
Strugar case
– Third Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Pavle Strugar, Third Amended Indictment, 10 December 2003, Case No. IT-01-42-PT.
– Decision on Jurisdiction
Prosecutor v. Pavle Strugar, Miodrag Jokic & Others, Decision on Defence Preliminary Motion Challenging Jurisdiction, Trial Chamber, 7 June 2002, Case No. IT-01-42-PT.
– Decision on Interlocutory Appeal
Prosecutor v. Pavle Strugar, Miodrag Jokic & Others, Decision on Interlocutory Appeal, Appeals Chamber, 22 November 2002, Case No. IT-01-42-AR72.
– Rule 98bis Decision
The Prosecutor v. Pavle Strugar, Decision on Defence Motion Requesting Judgment of Acquittal Pursuant to Rule 98 Bis, Trial Chamber II, 21 June 2004, Case No. IT-01-42-T.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Pavle Strugar, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 31 January 2005, Case No. IT-01-42-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Pavle Strugar, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 17 July 2008, Case No. IT-01-42-A.
Tadić case
Interlocutory Appeal:
The Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić aka “Dule”, Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction, Appeals Chamber, 2 October 1995, Case No. IT-94-1-AR72.
Second Amended Indictment:
The Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić aka “Dule” aka “Dušan” and Goran Borovnica, Second Amended Indictment, 14 December 1995, Case No. IT-94-1-I.
Prosecutor’s Pre-Trial Brief:
The Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić aka “Dule”, Prosecutor’s Pre-Trial Brief, 10 April 1996, Case No. IT-94-1-T.
Response to Prosecutor’s Pre-Trial Brief:
The Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić aka “Dule”, Response of the Defence to the Prosecutor’s Pre-trial Brief, 23 April 1996, Case No. IT-94-1-T.
Judgment:
The Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić aka “Dule”, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 7 May 1997, Case No. IT-94-1-T.
Judgment on Appeal:
The Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić aka “Dule”, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 15 July 1999, Case No. IT-94-1-A.
Tolimir case
– Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Zdravko Tolimir, Indictment, 28 August 2006, Case No. IT-05-88/2-I.
Trbić case
– Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Milorad Trbić, Indictment, 18 August 2006, Case No. IT-05-88/1-PT.
Vasiljević case
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Mitar Vasiljević, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 29 November 2002, Case No. IT-98-32-T.
Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Mitar Vasiljević, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 25 February 2004, Case No. IT-98-32-A.
Vojislav Šešelj case
– Second Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Vojislav Šešelj, Second Amended Indictment, 25 June 2007, Case No. IT-03-67.
– Decision on Financing the Defence of the Accused
The Prosecutor v. Vojislav Šešelj, Decision on Financing the Defence of the Accused, Pre-Trial Judge Jean-Claude Antonetti, 30 July 2007, Case No. IT-03-67.
– Decision on Prosecution’s Motion for Leave to File an Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Vojislav Šešelj, Decision on Prosecution’s Motion for Leave to File an Amended Indictment, Trial Chamber III, 14 September 2007, Case No. IT-03-67-PT.
– Decision on Appeal Against the Trial Chamber’s Decision (No. 2) on Assignment of Counsel
The Prosecutor v. Vojislav Šešelj, Decision on Appeal Against the Trial Chamber’s Decision (No. 2) on Assignment of Counsel, Appeals Chamber, 8 December 2006, Case No. IT-03-67-AR73.4.
Zelenović case
Sentencing Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Dragan Zelenović, Sentencing Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 4 April 2007, Case No. IT-96-23/2-S.
Župljanin case
– Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Stojan Župljanin, Second Amended Indictment, 6 October 2004, Case No. IT-99-36-I.
Case of the Major War Criminals
Indictment:
Trial of The Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal, Indictment, Nuremberg, 20 November 1945, Official Documents, Vol. I, p. 27.
Judgment:
Trial of The Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal, Judgment, Nuremberg, 1 October 1946, Official Documents, Vol. I, p. 171.
Case of the Major War Criminals
Indictment:
Trial of The Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal, Indictment, Tokyo, 29 April 1946.
Judgment:
Trial of The Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal, Judgment, Tokyo, 4–12 November 1948.
Chorzów Factory case (Merits)
Case concerning the Factory at Chorzów (Claim for Indemnity), Merits, Judgment of 13 September 1928, Collection of Judgments, Series A No. 17.
Bockarie case
– Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Sam Bockarie (also known as Mosquito also known as Maskita), Indictment, 7 March 2003, Case No. SCSL-03-04-I.
– Withdrawal of Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Sam Bockarie (also known as Mosquito also known as Maskita), Withdrawal of Indictment, 8 December 2003, Case No. SCSL-03-04-I-022.
Brima case
Further Amended Consolidated Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Alex Tamba Brima (also known as Tamba Alex Brima also known as Gullit), Brima Bazzy Kamara (also known as Ibrahim Bazzy Kamara also known as Alhaji Ibrahim Kamara) and Santigie Borbor Kanu (also known as 55 also known as Five-Five also known as Santigie Kanu also known as S.B. Kanu also known as Santigie Bobson Kanu also known as Borbor Santigie Kanu), Further Amended Consolidated Indictment, 18 February 2005, Case No. SCSL-04-16-PT.
Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Alex Tamba Brima, Brima Bazzy Kamara and Santigie Borbor Kanu, Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 20 June 2007, Case No. SCSL-04-16-T.
– Sentencing Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Alex Tamba Brima, Brima Bazzy Kamara and Santigie Borbor Kanu, Sentencing Judgment, Trial Chamber II, 19 July 2007, Case No. SCSL-04-16-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Alex Tamba Brima, Brima Bazzy Kamara and Santigie Borbor Kanu, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 22 February 2008, Case No. SCSL-04-16-A.
Fofana and Kondewa case
– Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Sam Hinga Norman, Moinina Fofana and Allieu Kondewa, Indictment, 4 February 2004, Case No. SCSL-03-14-I.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Moinina Fofana and Allieu Kondewa, Judgment, 2 August 2007, Case No. SCSL-04-14-T.
– Sentencing Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Moinina Fofana and Allieu Kondewa, Judgment on Sentencing of Moinina Fofana and Allieu Kondewa, 9 October 2007, Case No. SCSL-04-14-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Moinina Fofana and Allieu Kondewa, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 28 May 2008, Case No. SCSL-04-14-A.
Koroma case
– Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Johnny Paul Koroma (also known as JPK), Indictment, 7 March 2003, Case No. SCSL-03-I.
Norman case
– Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Sam Hinga Norman, Moinina Fofana and Allieu Kondewa, Indictment, 4 February 2004, Case No. SCSL-03-14-I.
– Decision on Preliminary Motion Based on Lack of Jurisdiction (Child Recruitment)
The Prosecutor v. Sam Hinga Norman, Decision on Preliminary Motion Based on Lack of Jurisdiction (Child Recruitment), Appeals Chamber, 31 May 2004, Case No. SCSL-2004-14-AR72(E).
Sankoh case
– Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Foday Saybana Sankoh also known as Popay also known as Papa also known as Pa, Indictment, 7 March 2003, Case No. SCSL-03-02-I-001.
– Withdrawal of Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Foday Saybana Sankoh also known as Popay also known as Papa also known as Pa, Withdrawal of Indictment, 8 December 2003, Case No. SCSL-03-02-I.
Sesay case
– Corrected Amended Consolidated Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Issa Hassan Sesay also known as Issa Sesay, Morris Kallon also known as Bilai Karim, and Augustine Gbao also known as Augustine Bao, Corrected Amended Consolidated Indictment, 2 August 2006, Case No. SCSL-04-15-PT.
– Judgment
The Prosecutor v. Issa Hassan Sesay also known as Issa Sesay, Morris Kallon also known as Bilai Karim, and Augustine Gbao also known as Augustine Bao, Judgment, Trial Chamber I, 2 March 2009, Case No. SCSL-04-15-T.
– Judgment on Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Issa Hassan Sesay also known as Issa Sesay, Morris Kallon also known as Bilai Karim, and Augustine Gbao also known as Augustine Bao, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 26 October 2009, Case No. SCSL-04-15-A.
Taylor case
– Decision on Immunity from Jurisdiction
The Prosecutor v. Charles Ghankay Taylor also known as Dankpannah Charles Ghankay Taylor also known as Dankpannah Charles Ghankay Macarthur Taylor, Decision on Immunity from Jurisdiction, Appeals Chamber, 31 May 2004, Case No. SCSL-03-01-I-059.
– Second Amended Indictment
The Prosecutor v. Charles Ghankay Taylor also known as Dankpannah Charles Ghankay Taylor also known as Dankpannah Charles Ghankay Macarthur Taylor, Second Amended Indictment, 29 May 2007, Case No. SCSL-03-01-PT.
Views adopted by the UN Human Rights Committee
Äärelä and Näkkäläjärvi v. Finland
Communication No. 779/1997, Anni Äärelä and Jouni Näkkäläjärvi v. Finland, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 24 October 2001, UN Doc. A/57/40, Vol. II, p. 117.
Abbassi v. Algeria
Communication No. 1368/2005, Salim Abbassi v. Algeria, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 21 June 2007, U.N. CCPR/C/89/D/1368/2005.
Aber v. Algeria
Communication No. 1439/2005, Sid Ahmed Aber v. Algeria, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 16 August 2007, UN Doc. CCPR/C/90/D/1439/2005.
Agabekova v. Uzbekistan
Communication No. 1071/2002, Nadezhda Agabekova v. Uzbekistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 3 May 2007, UN Doc. CCPR/C/89/D/1071/2002.
Ahani v. Canada
Communication No. 1051/2002, Mansour Ahani v. Canada, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 15 June 2004, UN Doc. CCPR/C/80/D/1051/2002.
Alba Cabriada v. Spain
Communication No. 1101/2002, José María Alba Cabriada v. Spain, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 15 November 2004, UN Doc. CCPR/C/82/D/1101/2002.
Alegre v. Peru
Communication No. 1126/2002, Marlem Carranza Alegre v. Peru, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 17 November 2005, UN Doc. CCPR/C/85/D/1126/2002.
Aliboev v. Tajikistan
Communication No. 985/2001, Valichon Aliboev v. Tajikistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 16 November 2005, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/85/D/985/2001.
Aliev v. Ukraine
Communication No. 781/1997, Azer Garyverdy ogly Aliev v. Ukraine, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 18 September 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/78/D/781/1997.
Altesor v. Uruguay
Communication No. R.2/10, Alice Altesor and Victor Hugo Altesor v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 29 March 1982, UN Doc. A/37/40, p. 122.
Alzery v. Sweden
Communication No. 1416/2005, Mohammed Alzery v. Sweden, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 10 November 2006, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/88/D/1416/2005.
Améndola Massiotti and Baritussio v. Uruguay
Communication No. 25/1978, Carmen Améndola Massiotti and Graciela Baritussio v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 26 July 1982, UN Doc. CCPR/C/OP/1, p. 136.
A.P. v. Italy
Communication No. 204/1986, A.P. v. Italy, Decision on admissibility, adopted on 2 November 1987, UN Doc. A/43/40, p. 242.
Arutyuniantz v. Uzbekistan
Communication No. 971/2001, Vazgen Arutyuniantz v. Uzbekistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 13 April 2005, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/83/D/971/2001.
Arutyunyan v. Uzbekistan
Communication No. 917/2000, Karina Arutyunyan v. Uzbekistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 13 May 2004, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/80/D/917/2000.
Arzuaga Gilboa v. Uruguay
Communication No. 147/1983, Lucía Arzuaga Gilboa v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 1 November 1985, UN Doc. A/41/40, p. 128.
Ashurov v. Uzbekistan
Communication No. 1348/2005, Rozik Ashurov v. Uzbekistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 3 May 2007, UN Doc. CCPR/C/89/D/1348/2005.
Baban v. Australia
Communication No. 1004/2001, Omar Sharif Baban v. Australia, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 18 September 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/78/D/1014/2001.
Bahamonde v. Equatorial Guinea
Communication No. 468/1991, Angel N. Oló Bahamonde v. Equatorial Guinea, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 20 October 1993, UN Doc. A/49/40, Vol. II, p. 183.
Bakhtiyari v. Australia
Communication No. 1069/2002, Ali Aqsar Bakhtiyari and Roqaiha Bakhtiyari v. Australia, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 6 November 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/79/D/1069/2002.
Bandajevsky v. Belarus
Communication Nos. 1100/2002, Yuri Bandajevsky v. Belarus, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 18 April 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/86/D/1100/2002.
Barzhig v. France
Communication No. 327/1988, Hervé Barzhig v. France, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 11 April 1991, UN Doc. A/46/40, p. 262.
Baumgarten v. Germany
Communication No. 960/2000, Klaus Dieter Baumgarten v. Germany, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 19 September 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/78/D/960/2000.
Bazarov v. Uzbekistan
Communication No. 959/2000, Saimijon and Malokhat Bazarov v. Uzbekistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 8 August 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/87/D/959/2000.
Becerra Barney v. Colombia
Communication No. 1298/2004, Manuel Francisco Becerra Barney v. Colombia, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 10 August 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/87/D/1298/2004.
Bee and Obiang v. Equatorial Guinea
Communication Nos. 1152/2003 and 1190/2003, Patricio Ndong Bee and María Jesús Bikene Obiang v. Equatorial Guinea, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 30 November 2005, UN Doc. CCPR/C/82/D/1152/2003 and CCPR/C/82/D/1190/2003.
Benhadj v. Algeria
Communication No. 1173/2003, Abdelhamid Benhadj v. Algeria, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 26 September 2007, UN Doc. CCPR/C/90/D/1173/2003.
Berry v. Jamaica
Communication No. 330/1988, Albert Berry v. Jamaica, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 7 April 1994, UN Doc. A/49/40, Vol. II, p. 20.
Boimurodov v. Tajikistan
Communication No. 1042/2001, Mustafakul Boimurodov v. Tajikistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 16 November 2005, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/85/D/1042/2001.
Boucherf v. Algeria
Communication No. 1196/2003, Fatma Zohra Boucherf v. Algeria, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 27 April 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/86/D/1196/2003.
Bousroual v. Algeria
Communication No. 992/2001, Louisa Bousroual v. Algeria, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 24 April 2006, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/86/D/992/2001.
Brough v. Australia
Communication No. 1184/2003, Corey Brough v. Australia, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 27 April 2006, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/86/D/1184/2003.
Buffo Carballal v. Uruguay
Communication No. 33/1978, Leopoldo Buffo Carballal v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 27 March 1981, UN Doc. A/36/40, p. 125.
Busyo et al. v. Democratic Republic of the Congo
Communication No. 933/2000, Adrien Mundyo Busyo et al. v. Democratic Republic of the Congo, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 19 September 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/78/D/933/2000.
Byahurunga v. Denmark
Communication No. 1222/2003, Jonny Rubin Byahuranga v. Denmark, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 9 December 2004, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/82/D/1222/2003.
Cabal and Pasini Bertran v. Australia
Communication No. 1020/2001, Carlos Cabal and Marco Pasini Bertran v. Australia, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 19 September 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/78/D/1020/2001.
Cadoret and Le Bihan v. France
Communications Nos. 221/1987 and 323/1988, Yves Cadoret and Hervé Le Bihan v. France, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 11 April 1991, UN Doc. A/46/40, p. 219.
Camargo v. Colombia
Communication No. 45/1979, Pedro Pablo Camargo (on behalf of the husband of María Fanny Suárez de Guerrero) v. Colombia, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 31 March 1982, UN Doc. A/37/40, p. 137.
Capellades v. Spain
Communication No. 1211/2003, Luis Oliveró Capellades v. Spain, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 8 August 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/87/D/1211/2003.
Cariboni v. Uruguay
Communication No. 159/1983, Cariboni v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 27 October 1987, UN Doc. A/43/40, p. 184.
Casafranca de Gomez v. Peru
Communication No. 981/2001, Teofila Casafranca de Gomez v. Peru, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 19 September 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/78/D/981/2001.
C.E.A. v. Finland
Communication No. 316/1988, C. E. A. v. Finland, Decision on admissibility, adopted on 10 July 1991, UN Doc. A/46/40, p. 293.
Celiberti de Casariego v. Uruguay
Communication No. 56/1979, Lilian Celiberti de Casariego v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 29 July 1981, UN Doc. A/36/40, p. 185.
Chambala v. Zambia
Communication No. 856/1999, Alex Soteli Chambala v. Zambia, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 30 July 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/78/D/856/1999.
Chan v. Guyana
Communication No. 913/2000, Lawrence Chan v. Guyana, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 23 January 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/85/D/913/2000.
Chikunova v. Uzbekistan
Communication No. 1043/2002, Tamara Chikunova v. Uzbekistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 3 May 2007, UN Doc. CCPR/C/89/D/1043/2002.
Chisanga v. Zambia
Communication No. 1132/2002, Webby Chisanga v. Zambia, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 18 November 2005, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/85/D/1132/2002.
C. L. D. v. France
Communication No. 439/1990, C. L. D. v. France, Decision on admissibility, adopted on 8 November 1991, UN Doc. A/47/40, p. 424.
Conde v. Spain
Communication No. 1325/2004, Mario Conde Conde v. Spain, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 13 November 2006, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/88/D/1325/2004.
Cornelis Van Hulst v. Netherlands
Communication No. 903/1999, Antonius Cornelis Van Hulst v. Netherlands, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 15 November 2004, UN Doc. CCPR/C/82/D/903/1999.
Correia de Matos v. Portugal
Communication No. 1123/2002, Carlos Correia de Matos v. Portugal, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 18 April 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/86/D/1123/2002.
Currie v. Jamaica
Communication No. 377/1989, Anthony Currie v. Jamaica, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 29 March 1994, UN Doc. A/49/40, Vol. II, p. 73.
D and E et al. v. Australia,
Communication No. 1050/2002, D and E, and their two children v. Australia, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 9 August 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/87/D/1050/2002.
Daniel Monguya Mbenge v. Zaire
Communication No. 16/1977, Daniel Monguya Mbenge v. Zaire, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 25 March 1983, UN Doc. A/38/40, p. 134.
Deidrick v. Jamaica
Communication No. 619/1995, Fray Deidrick v. Jamaica, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 9 April 1998, UN Doc. CCPR/C/62/D/619/1995.
Deolall v. Guyana
Communication No. 912/2000, Deolall v. Guyana, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 28 January 2005, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/82/D/912/2000.
Dermit Barbato v. Uruguay
Communication No. 84/1981, Guillermo Ignacio Dermit Barbato and Hugo Haroldo Dermit Barbato v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 21 October 1982, UN Doc. A/38/40, p. 124.
Domukovsky and Others v. Georgia
Communication No. 623 627/1995, Victor P. Domukovsky, Zaza Tsiklauri, Petre Gelbakhiani and Irakli Dokvadze v. Georgia, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 6 April 1998, UN Doc. A/53/40, Vol. II, p. 95.
Drescher Caldas v. Uruguay
Communication No. 43/1979, Drescher Caldas v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 21 July 1983, UN Doc. A/38/40, p. 192.
Dudko v. Australia
Communication No. 1347/2005, Lucy Dudko v. Australia, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 29 August 2007, UN Doc. CCPR/C/90/D/1347/2005.
Dugin v. Russian Federation
Communication No. 815/1998, Alexander Alexandrovitch Dugin v. Russian Federation, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 18 August 2004, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/81/D/815/1998.
E.B. v. New Zealand
Communication No. 1368/2005, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 21 June 2007, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/89/D/1368/2005.
El Alwani v. Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
Communication No. 1295/2004, Farag Mohammed El Alwani v. Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 29 August 2007, UN Doc. CCPR/C/90/D/1295/2004.
El Hassy v. Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
Communication No. 1422/2005, Edriss El Hassy v. Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 13 November 2007, UN Doc. CCPR/C/91/D/1422/2005.
Espinoza de Polay v. Peru
Communication No. 577/1994, R. Espinoza de Polay (on behalf of her husband Victor Alfredo Polay Campos) v. Peru, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 6 November 1997, UN Doc. A/53/40, Vol. II, p. 36.
Estrella v. Uruguay
Communication No. 74/1980, Miguel Ángel Estrella v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 29 March 1983, UN Doc. A/38/40, p. 150.
Evans v. Trinidad and Tobago
Communication No. 908/2000, Xavier Evans v. Trinidad and Tobago, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 5 May 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/77/D/908/2000.
Fernando v. Sri Lanka
Communication No. 1189/2003, Anthony Michael Emmanuel Fernando v. Sri Lanka, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 10 May 2005, UN Doc. CCPR/C/83/D/1189/2003.
Fijalkowska v. Poland
Communication No. 1061/2002, Bozena Fijalkowska v. Poland, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 4 August 2005, UN Doc. CCPR/C/84/D/1061/2002.
Filipovich v. Lithuania
Communication No. 875/1999, Jan Filipovich v. Lithuania, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 19 September 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/78/D/875/1999.
Francis v. Jamaica
Communication No. 320/1988, Victor Francis v. Jamaica, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 24 March 1993, UN Doc. A/48/40 (Part II), p. 62.
Fuenzalida v. Ecuador
Communication No. 480/1991, José Luis García Fuenzalida v. Ecuador, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 12 July 1996, UN Doc. A/51/40, Vol. II, p. 50.
García Lanza de Netto v. Uruguay
Communication No. 8/1977, Ana María García Lanza de Netto (on behalf of her aunt Beatriz Weismann Lanza and her uncle Alcides Lanza Perdomo, who later joined as submitting parties) v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 3 April 1980, UN Doc. A/35/40, p. 111.
Gelazauskas v. Lithuania
Communication No. 836/1998, Kestutis Gelazauskas v. Lithuania, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 2 June 2003, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/77/D/836/1998.
Gomariz v. Spain
Communication No. 1095/2002, Bernardino Gomaríz Valera, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 26 August 2005, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/84/D/1095/2002.
Gómez de Voituret v. Uruguay
Communication No. 109/1981, Teresa Gómez de Voituret v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 10 April 1984, UN Doc. A/39/40, p. 164.
Gorji-Dinka v. Cameroon
Communication No. 1134/2002, Fongum Gorji-Dinka v. Cameroon, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 10 May 2005, UN Doc. CCPR/C/83/D/1134/2002.
L. Grant v. Jamaica
Communication No. 353/1988, Lloyd Grant v. Jamaica, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 31 March 1994, UN Doc. A/49/40, Vol. II, p. 50.
P. Grant v. Jamaica
Communication No. 597/1994, Peter Grant v. Jamaica, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 22 March 1996, UN Doc. A/51/40, Vol. II, p. 206.
Gridin v. Russia
Communication No. 770/1997, Dimitry L. Gridin v. Russia, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 20 July 2000, UN Doc. A/55/40, Vol. II, p. 172.
Grioua v. Algeria
Communication No. 1327/2004, Messaouda Grioua v. Algeria, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 16 August 2007, UN Doc. CCPR/C/90/D/1327/2004.
Guesdon v. France
Communication No. 219/1986, Dominique Guesdon v. France, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 25 July 1990, UN Doc. A/45/40, Vol. II, p. 61.
Harward v. Norway
Communication No. 451/1991, Barry Stephen Harward v. Norway, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 15 July 1994, UN Doc. A/49/40, Vol. II, p. 146.
Henry v. Jamaica
Communication No. 230/1987, Raphaël Henry v. Jamaica, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 1 November 1991, UN Doc. A/47/40, p. 210.
Hernández Valentini de Bazzano v. Uruguay
Communication No. 5/1977, Moriana Hernández Valentini de Bazzano (on her own behalf as well as on behalf of Luis María Bazzano Ambrosini, Martha Valentini de Massera and José Luis Massera) v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 15 August 1979, UN Doc. A/34/40, p. 124.
Herrera Rubio v. Colombia
Communication No. 161/1983, Herrera Rubio v. Colombia, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 2 November 1987, UN Doc. A/43/40, p. 190.
Hiber Conteris v. Uruguay
Communication No. 139/1983, Hiber Conteris v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 17 July 1985, UN Doc. A/40/40, p. 196.
Howell v. Jamaica
Communication No. 798/1998, Floyd Howell v. Jamaica, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 7 November 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/78/D/798/1998.
Hruska v. Czech Republic
Communication No. 1191/2003, Elizabeth Hruska v. Czech Republic, Inadmissibility Decision, 7 November 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/79/D/1191/2003.
Hussain and Singh v. Guyana
Communication No. 862/1999, Hazerat Hussain and Sumintra Singh v. Guyana, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 14 December 2004, UN Doc. CCPR/C/85/D/862/1999.
Ilombe and Shandwe v. Democratic Republic of the Congo
Communication No. 1177/2003, Willy Wenga Ilombe and Nsii Luanda Shandwe v. Democratic Republic of the Congo, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 16 May 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/86/D/1177/2003.
Johnson v. Jamaica
Communication No. 588/1994, Errol Johnson v. Jamaica, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 22 March 1996, UN Doc. A/51/40, Vol. II, p. 174.
Joseph et al. v. Sri Lanka,
Communication No. 1249/2004, Sister Immaculate Joseph and 80 Teaching Sisters of the Holy Cross of the Third Order of Saint Francis in Menzingen of Sri Lanka v. Sri Lanka, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 18 November 2005, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/85/D/1249/2004.
Juma v. Australia
Communication No. 984/2001, Shukuru Juma v. Australia, Inadmissibility Decision under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 1 September 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/78/D/984/2001.
Kang v. Republic of Korea
Communication No. 878/1999, Yong-Joo Kang v. Republic of Korea, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 23 July 2003, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/78/D/878/1999.
Kankanamge v. Sri Lanka
Communication No. 909/2000, Victor Ivan Majuwana Kankanamge v. Sri Lanka, Views, 26 August 2004, UN Doc. CCPR/C/81/D/909/2000.
Karimov and Nursatov v. Tajikistan
Communication Nos. 1108/2002 and 1121/2002, Makhmadim Karimov and Amon Nursatov v. Tajikistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 3 May 2007, UN Doc. CCPR/C/89/D/1108 & 1121/2002.
Karttunen v. Finland
Communication No. 387/1989, Arvo O. Karttunen v. Finland, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 23 October 1992, UN Doc. A/48/40, p. 362.
Kelly v. Jamaica
Communication No. 253/1987, Paul Kelly v. Jamaica, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 8 April 1991, UN Doc. A/46/40, p. 241.
Khalilov v. Tajikistan
Communication No. 973/2001, Validzhon Khalilov v. Tajikistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 13 April 2005, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/83/D/973/2001.
Khan v. Canada
Communication No. 1302/2004, Dawood Khan v. Canada, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 10 August 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/87/D/1302/2004.
Kharkhal v. Belarus
Communication No. 1161/2003, Dimitry Kharkhal v. Belarus, Inadmissibility Decision, 15 November 2007, UN Doc. CCPR/C/91/D/1161/2003.
Khomidova v. Tajikistan
Communication No. 1117/2002, Saodat Khomidova v. Tajikistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 25 August 2004, UN Doc. CCPR/C/81/D/1117/2002.
Khudayberganova v. Uzbekistan
Communication No. 1140/2002, Matlyuba Khudayberganova v. Uzbekistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 7 August 2007, CCPR/C/90/D/1140/2002.
Kimouche v. Algeria
Communication No. 1328/2004, S. Messaouda Kimouche and Mokhtar Kimouche v. Algeria, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 16 August 2007, UN Doc. CCPR/C/90/D/1328/2004.
Kouidis v. Greece
Communication No. 1070/2002, Alexandros Kouidis v. Greece, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 26 April 2006, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/86/D/1070/2002.
Kurbanov v. Tajikistan
Communication No. 1096/2002, Abduali Ismatovich Kurbanov v. Tajikistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 12 November 2003, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/79/D/1096/2002.
Kurbonov v. Tajikistan
Communication No. 1208/2003, Bakhridin Kurbonov, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 19 April 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/86/D/1208/2003.
Lafuente Peñarrieta and Others v. Bolivia
Communication No. 176/1984, Lafuente Peñarrieta and Others v. Bolivia, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 2 November 1987, UN Doc. A/43/40, p. 199.
Larrañaga v. Philippines
Communication No. 1421/2005, Francisco Juan Larrañaga v. Philippines, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 14 September 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/87/D/1421/2005.
Larrosa Bequio v. Uruguay
Communication No. 88/1981, Gustavo Raúl Larrosa Bequio v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 29 March 1983, UN Doc. A/38/40, p. 180.
Lederbauer v. Austria
Communication No. 1454/2006, Wolfgang Lederbauer v. Austria, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 11 September 2007, UN Doc. CCPR/C/90/D/1454/2006.
Little v. Jamaica
Communication No. 283/1988, Aston Little v. Jamaica, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 1 November 1991, UN Doc. A/47/40, p. 268.
Lobban v. Jamaica
Communication No. 797/1998, Dennis Lobban v. Jamaica, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 13 May 2004, UN Doc. CCPR/C/80/D/797/1998.
Lumley v. Jamaica
Communication No. 662/1995, Peter Lumley v. Jamaica, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 31 March 1999, UN Doc. A/54/40, Vol. II, p. 142.
Luyeye Magana ex-Philibert v. Zaire
Communication No. 90/1981, Luyeye Magana ex-Philibert v. Zaire, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 21 July 1983, UN Doc. A/38/40, p. 197.
Lyashkevich v. Belarus
Communication No. 887/1999, Mariya Staselovich (on her behalf and on behalf of her son Igor Lyashkevich) v. Belarus, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 3 April 2003, UN Doc. A/58/40, Vol. II, p. 169.
Madafferi v. Australia
Communication No. 1011/2001, Francesco Madafferi and Anna Maria Immacolata Madafferi v. Australia, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 26 August 2004, UN Doc. CCPR/C/81/D/1011/2001.
Malakhovsky and Pikul v. Belarus
Communication No. 1207/2003, Sergei Malakhovsky and Alexander Pikul v. Belarus, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 23 August 2005, UN Doc. CCPR/C/84/D/1207/2003.
Marais v. Madagascar
Communication No. 49/1979, Dave Marais, Jr. v. Madagascar, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 24 March 1983, UN Doc. A/38/40, p. 141.
Marques de Morais v. Angola
Communication No. 1128/2002, Rafael Marques de Morais v. Angola, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 18 April 2005, UN Doc. CCPR/C/83/D/1128/2002.
Martínez Fernández v. Spain
Communication No. 1104/2002, Antonio Martínez Fernández v. Spain, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 25 May 2005, UN Doc. CCPR/C/83/D/1104/2002.
Martínez Machado v. Uruguay
Communication No. 83/1981, Raúl Noel Martínez Machado v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 4 November 1983, UN Doc. A/39/40, p. 148.
Martínez Portorreal v. the Dominican Republic
Communication No. 188/1984, Martínez Portorreal v. the Dominican Republic, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 5 November 1987, UN Doc. A/43/40, p. 207.
Medjnoune v. Algeria
Communication No. 1297/2004, Ali Medjnoune v. Algeria, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 9 August 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/87/D/1297/2004.
Moreno v. Spain
Communication No. 1381/2005, Jaques Hachuel Moreno v. Spain, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 15 November 2004, UN Doc. CCPR/C/90/D/1381/2005.
Mukong v. Cameroon
Communication No. 458/1991, Alber Womah Mukong v. Cameroon, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 8 July 1992, UN Doc. A/49/40, p. 171.
Mulai v. Guyana
Communication No. 811/1998, Rookmin Mulai v. Guyana, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 18 August 2004, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/81/D/811/1998.
Mulezi v. Democratic Republic of the Congo
Communication No. 962/2001, Marcel Mulezi v. Democratic Republic of the Congo, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 23 July 2004, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/81/D/962/2001.
Muñoz v. Spain
Communication No. 1006/2001, José Martinez Muñoz v. Spain, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 4 February 2004, UN Doc. CCPR/C/79/D/1006/2001.
Nazarov v. Uzbekistan
Communication No. 911/2000, Abdumalik Nazarov v. Uzbekistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 19 August 2004, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/81/D/911/2000.
Njaru v. Cameroon
Communication No. 1353/2005, Philip Afuson Njaru v. Cameroon, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 14 May 2007, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/89/D/1353/2005.
O. F. v. Norway
Communication No. 158/1983, O. F. v. Norway, Decision on admissibility, adopted on 26 October 1984, UN Doc. A/40/40, p. 204.
Pagdayawon v. Philippines
Communication No. 1110/2002, Rolando Pagdayawon v. Philippines, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 8 December 2004, UN Doc. CCPR/C/82/D/1110/2002.
Pastukhov v. Belarus
Communication No. 814/1998, Mikhail Ivanovich Pastukhov v. Belarus, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 17 September 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/78/D/814/1998.
Persaud and Rampersaud v. Guyana
Communication No. 812/1998, Raymond Persaud and Rampersaud v. Guyana, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 16 May 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/86/D/812/1998/Rev.1.
Perterer v. Austria
Communication No. 1015/2001, Paul Perterer v. Austria, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 20 August 2004, UN Doc. CCPR/C/81/D/1015/2001.
Pietraroia v. Uruguay
Communication No. 44/1979, Alba Pietraroia (on behalf of her father, Rosario Pietraroia, also known as Rosario Pietraroia (or Roya) Zapala) v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 27 March 1981, UN Doc. A/36/40, p. 153.
Platonov v. Russian Federation
Communication No. 1218/2003, Andrei Platonov v. Russian Federation, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 16 November 2005, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/85/D/1218/2003.
Pryce v. Jamaica
Communication No. 793/1998, Errol Pryce v. Jamaica, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 13 May 2004, UN Doc. CCPR/C/80/D/793/1998.
Quinteros v. Uruguay
Communication No. 107/1981, Elena Quinteros and M. C. Almeida de Quinteros v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 21 July 1983, UN Doc. A/38/40, p. 216.
Quispe Roque v. Peru
Communication No. 1125/2002, Jorge Luis Quispe Roque v. Peru, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 17 November 2005, UN Doc. CCPR/C/85/D/1125/2002.
Rameka et al. v. New Zealand
Communication No. 1090/2002, Tai Wairiki Rameka et al. v. New Zealand, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 15 December 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/79/D/1090/2002.
Ratiani v. Georgia
Communication No. 1134/2002, Shota Ratiani v. Georgia, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 4 August 2005, UN Doc. CCPR/C/84/D/975/2001.
Rayos v. Philippines
Communication No. 1167/2003, Ramil Rayos v. Philippines, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 7 September 2004, UN Doc. CCPR/C/81/D/1167/2003.
Reece v. Jamaica
Communication No. 796/1998, Lloyd Reece v. Jamaica, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 21 July 2003, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/78/D/796/1998.
Romanov v. Ukraine
Communication No. 842/1998, Sergei Romanov v. Ukraine, Inadmissibility Decision, 11 November 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/79/D/842/1998.
Rouse v. Philippines
Communication No. 1089/2002, Leon R. Rouse v. Philippines, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 5 August 2005, UN Doc. CCPR/C/84/D/1089/2002.
Saidova v. Tajikistan
Communication No. 964/2001, Barno Saidova v. Tajikistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 20 August 2004, UN Doc. CCPR/C/81/D/964/2001.
Sala de Tourón v. Uruguay
Communication No. 32/1978, Lucía Sala de Tourón v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 31 March 1981, UN Doc. A/36/40, p. 120.
Saldías López v. Uruguay
Communication No. 52/1979, Delia Saldías de López (on behalf of her husband, Sergio Rubén López Burgos) v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 29 July 1981, UN Doc. A/36/40, p. 176.
Salgar de Montejo v. Colombia
Communication No. 64/1979, Consuelo Salgar de Montejo v. Colombia, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 24 March 1982, UN Doc. A/37/40, p. 168.
Sánchez and Clares v. Spain
Communication No. 1332/2004, Luis Oliveró Capellades v. Spain, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 15 November 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/88/D/1332/2004.
Sankara et al v. Burkina Faso
Communication No. 1159/2003, Mariam Sankara et al v. Burkina Faso, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 11 April 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/86/D/1159/2003.
Santullo Valcada v. Uruguay
Communication No. 9/1977, Edgardo Dante Santullo Valcada v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 26 October 1979, UN Doc. A/35/40, p. 107.
Sarma v. Sri Lanka
Communication No. 950/2000, S. Jagatheeswara Sarma v. Sri Lanka, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 31 July 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/78/D/950/2000.
Schedko v. Belarus
Communication No. 886/1999, Natalia Schedko v. Belarus, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 28 April 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/77/D/886/1999.
Sequeria v. Uruguay
Communication No. 6/1977, Miguel A. Millán Sequeria v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 29 July 1980, UN Doc. A/35/40, p. 127.
Shams et al. v. Australia
Communication No. 1255, 1256, 1259, 1260, 1266, 1268, 1270, 1288/2004., Saed Shams et al. v. Australia, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 11 September 2007, UN Doc. CCPR/C/90/D/1255, 1256, 1259, 1260, 1266, 1268, 1270 & 1288/2004.
Shukurova v. Tajikistan
Communication No. 1044/2002, Davlatbibi Shukurova v. Tajikistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 26 April 2006, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/86/D/1044/2002.
Siewpersaud et al. v. Trinidad and Tobago
Communication No. 938/2000, Girjadat Siewpersaud et al. v. Trinidad and Tobago, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 19 August 2004, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/81/D/938/2000.
Sineiro Fernández v. Spain
Communication No. 1007/2001, Manuel Sineiro Fernández v. Spain, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 19 September 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/78/D/1007/2001.
Singarasa v. Sri Lanka
Communication No. 1033/2001, Nallaratnam Singarasa v. Tajikistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 23 August 2004, UN Doc. CCPR/C/81/D/1033/2001.
Singh v. Canada
Communication No. 1315/2004, Daljit Singh v. Canada, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 28 April 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/86/D/1315/2004.
Sirageva v. Uzbekistan
Communication No. 907/2000, Nazira Sirageva v. Uzbekistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 18 November 2005, UN Doc. CCPR/C/85/D/907/2000.
Smartt v. Guyana
Communication No. 867/1999, Daphne Smartt v. Guyana, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 19 August 2004, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/81/D/867/1999.
Smirnova v. Russian Federation
Communication No. 712/1996, Yelena Pavlovna Smirnova v. Russian Federation, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 18 August 2004, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/81/D/962/2001.
Soriano de Bouton v. Uruguay
Communication No. 37/1978, Esther Soriano de Bouton v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 27 March 1981, UN Doc. A/36/40, p. 143.
Staselovich v. Belarus
Communication No. 887/1999, Mariya Staselovich v. Belarus, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 24 April 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/77/D/887/1999.
Stephens v. Jamaica
Communication No. 373/1989, Lennon Stephens v. Jamaica, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 18 October 1995, UN Doc. A/51/40, Vol. II, p. 1.
Strakhova and Fayzullaev v. Uzbekistan
Communications Nos. 1017/2001 and 1066/2002, S. Strakhova and Asad Fayzullaev v. Uzbekistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 7 August 2007, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/90/D/1017/2001&1066/2002.
Sultanova v. Uzbekistan
Communication No. 915/2000, Darmon Sultanova v. Uzbekistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 19 April 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/86/D/915/2000.
Tarasova v. Uzbekistan
Communication No. 1057/2002, Larisa Tarasova v. Uzbekistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 10 November 2006, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/88/D/1057/2002.
Taright et al. v. Algeria
Communication No. 1085/2002, Abdelhamid Taright at al. v. Democratic Republic of the Congo, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 16 May 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/86/D/1085/2002.
Telitsina v. Russian Federation
Communication No. 888/1999, Yuliya Vasilyevna Telitsina v. Russian Federation, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 29 April 2004, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/80/D/888/1999.
Terán Jijón v. Ecuador
Communication No. 277/1988, Juan Terán Jijón v. Ecuador, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 26 March 1992, UN Doc. A/47/40, p. 261.
Terrón v. Spain
Communication No. 1073/2002, Jesús Terrón v. Spain, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 15 November 2004, UN Doc. CCPR/C/82/D/1073/2002.
Teti Izquierdo v. Uruguay
Communication No. 73/1980, Ana María Teti Izquierdo (on behalf of her brother, Mario Alberto Teti Izquierdo) v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 1 April 1982, UN Doc. A/37/40, p. 179.
Thomas v. Jamaica
Communication No. 532/1993, Maurice Thomas v. Jamaica, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 3 November 1997, UN Doc. A/53/40, Vol. II, p. 1.
Titiahonjo v. Cameroon
Communication No. 1186/2003, Dorothy Kakem Titiahonjo v. Cameroon, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 13 November 2007, UN Doc. CCPR/C/91/D/1186/2003.
Torres Ramírez v. Uruguay
Communication No. 4/1977, William Torres Ramírez v. Uruguay, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 23 July 1980, UN Doc. A/35/40, p. 121.
Tshitenge Muteba v. Zaire
Communication No. 124/1982, Tshitenge Muteba v. Zaire, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 24 July 1984, UN Doc. A/39/40, p. 182.
Tulyaganova v. Uzbekistan
Communication No. 1041/2001, Shevkhie Tulyaganova v. Uzbekistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 7 August 2007, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/90/D/1041/2001.
Uteeva v. Uzbekistan
Communication No. 1150/2003, Roza Uteeva v. Uzbekistan, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 13 November 2007, UN Doc. CCPR/C/91/D/1150/2003.
Vargas Más v. Peru
Communication No. 1058/2002, Antonino Vargas Más v. Peru, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 16 November 2005, UN Doc. CCPR/C/85/D/1058/2002.
Weiss v. Austria
Communication No. 1086/2002, Sholam Weiss v. Austria, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 15 May 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/77/D/1086/2002.
Wight v. Madagascar
Communication No. 115/1982, John Wight v. Madagascar, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 1 April 1985, UN Doc. A/40/40, p. 171.
Wilson v. Philippines
Communication No. 868/1999, Albert Wilson v. Philippines, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 11 November 2003, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/79/D/868/1999.
Wolf v. Panama
Communication No. 289/1988, Dieter Wolf v. Panama, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 26 March 1992, UN Doc. A/47/40, p. 277.
Yoon and Choi v. Republic of Korea
Communication Nos. 1321/2004 and 1322/2004, Yeo-Bum Yoon and Myung-Jin Choi v. Republic of Korea, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, 23 January 2007, UN Doc. CCPR/C/88/D/1321-1322/2004.
Zheikov v. Russian Federation
Communication No. 889/1999, Valentine Zheikov v. Russian Federation, Views under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, adopted on 11 April 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/85/D/889/1999.
Z.P. v. Canada
Communication No. 341/1988, Z.P. v. Canada, Decision on admissibility, adopted on 11 April 1991, UN Doc. A/46/40, p. 297.
General Comments adopted by the UN Human Rights Committee
General Comment No. 31, Nature of the General Legal Obligation Imposed on States Parties to the Covenant, CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add. 13, 26 May 2004.
General Comment No. 32, Article 14: Right to Equality before Courts and Tribunals and to a Fair Trial, CCPR/C/GC/32, 23 August 2007.
Concluding observations adopted by the UN Human Rights Committee
Concluding observations on the first periodic report of Albania, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/82/ALB, 2 December 2004.
Concluding observations on the fourth periodic report of Austria, UN Doc. CCPR/C/AUT/CO/4, 30 October 2007.
Concluding observations on the third periodic report of Barbados, UN Doc. CCPR/C/BRB/CO/3, 11 May 2007.
Concluding observations on the fourth periodic report of Belgium, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/81/BEL, 12 August 2004.
Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Benin, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/82/BEN, 1 December 2004.
Concluding observations on the initial report of Bosnia and Herzegovina, UN Doc. CCPR/C/BIH/CO/1, 22 November 2006.
Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Brazil, UN Doc. CCPR/C/BRA/CO/2, 1 December 2005.
Concluding observations on the fifth periodic report of Canada, UN Doc. CCPR/C/CAN/CO/5, 20 April 2006.
Concluding observations on the second periodic report of the Central African Republic, UN Doc. CCPR/C/CAF/CO/2, 27 July 2006.
Concluding observations on the fifth periodic report of Chile, UN Doc. CCPR/C/CHL/CO/5, 18 May 2007.
Concluding observations on the fifth periodic report of Colombia, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/80/COL, 26 May 2004.
Concluding observations on the fifth periodic report of Costa Rica, UN Doc. CCPR/C/CRI/CO/5, 16 November 2007.
Concluding observations on the second periodic report of the Czech Republic, UN Doc. CCPR/C/CZE/CO/2, 9 August 2007.
Concluding observations on the third periodic report of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, UN Doc. CCPR/C/COD/CO/3, 26 April 2006.
Concluding observations on the consolidated third, fourth and fifth periodic reports of El Salvador, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/78/SLV, 22 August 2003.
Concluding observations on the situation of civil and political rights in Equatorial Guinea, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/79/GNQ, 13 August 2004.
Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Estonia, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/77/EST, 15 April 2003.
Concluding observations on the fifth periodic report of Finland, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/82/FIN, 2 December 2004.
Concluding observations on the situation of civil and political rights in The Gambia, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/75/GMB, 12 August 2004.
Concluding observations on the third periodic report of Georgia, UN Doc. CCPR/C/GEO/CO/3, 15 November 2007.
Concluding observations on the fifth periodic report of Germany, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/80/DEU, 4 May 2004.
Concluding observations on the first periodic report of Greece, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/83/GRC, 25 April 2005.
Concluding observations on the initial periodic report of Honduras, UN Doc. CCPR/C/HND/CO/1, 13 December 2006.
Concluding observations on the fourth periodic report of Iceland, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/83/ISL, 25 April 2005.
Concluding observations on the fifth periodic report of Italy, UN Doc. CCPR/C/ITA/CO/5, 24 April 2006.
Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Israel, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/78/ISR, 21 August 2003.
Concluding observations on the second period report of Kenya, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/83/KEN, 29 April 2005.
Concluding observations on the third periodic report of the Republic of Korea, UN Doc. CCPR/C/KOR/CO/3, 28 November 2006.
Concluding observations on the report submitted by the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo on the human rights situation in Kosovo since June 1999, UN Doc. CCPR/C/UNK/CO/1, 14 August 2006.
Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Latvia, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/79/LVA, 1 December 2003.
Concluding observations on the fourth periodic report of Libya, UN Doc. CCPR/C/LBY/CO/4, 15 November 2007.
Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Lithuania, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/80/LTU, 4 May 2004.
Concluding observations on the third periodic report of Luxembourg, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/77/LUX, 15 April 2003.
Concluding observations on the third periodic report of Madagascar, UN Doc. CCPR/C/MDG/CO/3, 11 May 2007.
Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Mali, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/77/MLI, 16 April 2003.
Concluding observations on the fourth periodic report of Mauritius, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/83/MUS, 27 April 2005.
Concluding observations on the fifth periodic report of Morocco, UN Doc. CCPR/C/MAR/2004/5, 11 May 2004.
Concluding observations on the initial report of Namibia, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/81/NAM, 13 August 2004.
Concluding observations on the fifth periodic report of Norway, UN Doc. CCPR/C/NOR/CO/5, 25 April 2006.
Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Paraguay, UN Doc. CCPR/C/PRY/CO/2, 24 April 2006.
Concluding observations on the consolidated second and third periodic reports of the Philippines, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/79/PHL, 1 December 2003.
Concluding observations on the fifth periodic report of Poland, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/82/POL, 2 December 2004
Concluding observations on the third periodic report Portugal, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/78/PRT, 17 September 2003.
Concluding observations on the fifth periodic report of the Russian Federation, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/79/RUS, 1 December 2003.
Concluding observations on the initial report of Serbia and Montenegro, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/81/SEMO, 12 August 2004.
Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Slovakia, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/78/SVK, 22 August 2003.
Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Slovenia, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/84/SVN, 25 July 2005.
Concluding observations on the combined fourth and fifth periodic reports of Sri Lanka, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/79/LKA, 1 December 2003.
Concluding observations on the third periodic report of the Sudan, UN Doc. CCPR/C/SDN/CO/3, 29 August 2007.
Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Suriname, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/80/SUR, 4 May 2004.
Concluding observations on the third periodic report of Syria, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/84/SYR, 9 August 2005.
Concluding observations on the initial report of Tajikistan, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/84/TJK, 18 July 2005.
Concluding observations on the first periodic report of Thailand, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/84/THA, 8 July 2005.
Concluding observations on the initial report of Uganda, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/80/UGA, 4 May 2004.
Concluding observations on the sixth periodic report of Ukraine, UN Doc. CCPR/C/UKR/CO/6, 28 November 2006.
Concluding observations on the combined second and third periodic reports of the United States of America, UN Doc. CCPR/C/USA/CO/3/Rev.1, 18 December 2006.
Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Uzbekistan, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/83/UZB, 26 April 2005.
Concluding observations on the fourth periodic report of Yemen, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/84/YEM, 9 August 2005.
Concluding observations on the third periodic report of Zambia, UN Doc. CCPR/C/ZMB/CO/3, 9 August 2007.