2.2 The company lodged a complaint against the author for misappropriation.

(b) The name of the State party against which the complaint is directed

5.2 Before considering any claims contained in a complaint, the Committee against Torture must decide whether or not the complaint is admissible under article 22 of the Convention.

6.1 Before considering any claims contained in a complaint, the Committee against Torture must decide whether or not the complaint is admissible under article 22 of the Convention.

3.1 The author's complaint concerns primarily the right to an effective appeal against conviction and sentence.

The complaint was also filed against other OAS member states for their alleged conspiracy with Argentina.

2.1 On 16 August 1991, Ms. Gascon, the author's then wife, lodged a complaint against the author for allegedly making death threats against her.

2.17 The Thisted police rejected the complaint against the Progressive Party on the basis that the State party's law, as it then stood, did not permit a complaint of violation of section 266 (b) to be filed against entities with legal personality, including a political party.

2.4 On 24 December 1997, the author filed a complaint against the HREOC in the Federal Court of Australia.

European Committee of Social Rights, STTK ry and Tehy ry against Finland, complaint No. 10 2000, decision on the merits.

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

The mother refused to file a complaint against the attackers, whom she knew, in order to avoid trouble between their families.

(c) On 13 March 1997, the author filed a complaint of ill treatment against the authorities of the Puerto I penitentiary.

Complaint No.

The complaint

The complaint

The complaint

The complaint

Accordingly, the Committee against Torture decided that the complaint was admissible, in part, as set out in paragraphs 9.2 to 9.5 above.

6.2 On the issue of exhaustion of domestic remedies, the Committee notes that the petitioner confines his complaint to the handling of the complaint made against Mr. Andreasen, a case in which he did appeal to the Ministry of Justice.

2.8 By submission of 3 February 2004, the authors informed that on 13 July 2003 they had filed a complaint in the International Criminal Court against Argentina for an alleged crime against humanity committed against them.

If his argument is that he is not receiving equal protection of the law, because he, unlike persons complaining against Commonwealth agencies, cannot bring a complaint under the HREOC Act 1986 (Cth), it submits that what is at issue is not whether he can file a complaint under a particular law or before a particular body but rather whether he can bring a complaint before a decision making body competent to decide on the substance of his complaint.

Having concluded its consideration of complaint No. 223 2002, submitted to the Committee against Torture by S.U.A. under article 22 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,

Having concluded its consideration of complaint No. 226 2003, submitted to the Committee against Torture by T.A. under article 22 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,

bearing with one another, and forgiving each other, if any man has a complaint against any even as Christ forgave you, so you also do.

bearing with one another, and forgiving each other, if any man has a complaint against any even as Christ forgave you, so you also do.

After national legal remedies have been exhausted, they may submit a complaint to the Committee on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women.

Having concluded its consideration of complaint No. 220 2002, submitted to the Committee against Torture by Mr. R.D. under article 22 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,

Having concluded its consideration of complaint No. 221 2002, submitted to the Committee against Torture by Mr. M.M.K. under article 22 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,

Having concluded its consideration of complaint No. 211 2002, submitted to the Committee against Torture by Mr. P.A.C. under article 22 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,

Having concluded its consideration of complaint No. 218 2002, submitted to the Committee against Torture by Mr. L.J.R.C. under article 22 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,

2.4 On 12 December 2002, DRC filed a complaint with the Board and specifically asked whether the language requirement was compatible with the Act against Discrimination.

Complaint by Cuba (S 10993).

Having concluded its consideration of complaint No. 195 2002, submitted to the Committee against Torture by Mr. Mafhoud Brada under article 22 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,

Having concluded its consideration of complaint No. 207 2002, submitted to the Committee against Torture by Mr. Dragan Dimitrijevic under article 22 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,

Having considered complaint No. 233 2003, submitted to the Committee against Torture by Mr. Ahmed Hussein Mustafa Kamil Agiza, under article 22 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,

7.1 Before considering any claims contained in a complaint, the Committee against Torture must decide whether or not it is admissible under article 22 of the Convention.

6.1 Before considering any claims contained in a complaint, the Committee against Torture must decide whether or not it is admissible under article 22 of the Convention.

6.1 Before considering any claims contained in a complaint, the Committee against Torture must decide whether or not it is admissible under article 22 of the Convention.

In particular, please specify if there are complaint mechanisms, remedies and sanctions to prevent discrimination against women and how the application of laws prohibiting discrimination is monitored.

Further, since the State took all possible steps to prosecute the alleged offenders there can be no cause for further complaint against the State in this regard.

5.2 On 28 November 2003, the author's complaint against the two prison guards was taken up in the Colombo Chief Magistrate's court, and the author was present.

At its 21st meeting, on 9 May, the Committee had before it a complaint lodged by the Government of China against the NGO, A Woman's Voice International.

Having concluded its consideration of complaint No. 212 2002, submitted to the Committee against Torture by Mr. Kepa Urra Guridi under article 22 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,

There is no cause for complaint.