In 12 countries, this principle was always applied six States reported that it was applied usually 32 reported that it was applied exceptionally and 10 reported that it was never applied.

Eleven countries reported that this principle was usually applied, and in one it was never applied.

Five countries reported that this principle was applied usually, and one noted that it was applied exceptionally.

Others reported that this principle was applied usually and one country reported that it was applied exceptionally.

Three countries reported that this principle was applied usually one country noted that it was applied exceptionally.

In some countries, this practice was applied usually and four countries noted that it was applied exceptionally.

Several countries reported that this principle was usually applied and one country reported that it was applied exceptionally.

Another 12 countries noted that this principle was applied usually, while in 37 countries it was applied exceptionally.

In three countries, this principle was applied usually.

In 11 countries, this principle was usually applied.

In two countries, this practice was usually applied.

In three countries, this practice was usually applied.

In some countries, this principle was usually applied.

Some countries indicated that this principle was usually applied.

Five countries reported that this principle was applied usually.

In two countries, this practice was applied to a certain extent, and one country reported that it was applied only exceptionally.

Seven other countries reported that this principle was usually applied.

Five countries observed that this principle was applied to a certain extent, and one reported that it was applied in some specific situations.

In two countries, this practice was applied to a certain extent and one country reported that it was applied in some specific situations.

In two countries, this practice was applied to a certain extent.

In two countries, this principle was applied to a certain extent.

Two countries informed that this principle was applied in some specific situations.

One country reported that this principle was applied to a certain extent.

(a) How was the Classified Information Proceeding Act (CIPA) applied in this case?

Australia, Costa Rica, Jamaica and Mongolia reported that this principle was usually applied.

In 31 countries, it was applied exceptionally, and in 19 countries, it was never applied.

In 31 countries it was applied exceptionally and in 22 countries it was never applied.

Liechtenstein, Mongolia and the Republic of Korea reported that this principle was usually applied.

Jordan, Peru and Singapore replied that this principle was applied to a certain extent.

In Singapore, this principle was always applied, following judicial practice and not by law.

It was applied exceptionally in 23 countries, while in 10 other States it was never applied.

Argentina and Australia (Australian Capital Territory) applied this principle to a certain extent, while it was applied only in some specific situations in Western Australia.

The Law was fully applied.

Two countries reported that it was applied in some specific situations or that it was never applied.

However, Colombia, Haiti, Tajikistan and Venezuela reported that this Rule was applied exceptionally or never.

Kuwait reported that this principle was only exceptionally applied, and that the practice was mandatory in certain specified cases.

This project was implemented by the University of the Philippines Training Center of Applied Geodesy and Photogrammetry.

Argentina, Colombia, Denmark, France and Iran reported that this principle was only applied to a certain extent.

This rule was reported to be applied in all countries, though some said that the food was not always well served.

Malawi reported that it was applied exceptionally.

In one country, it was never applied.

One country reported that it was applied in some specific situations, while another State noted that it was applied only exceptionally.

This rule is applied to foreigners only.

In Armenia and Pakistan this Rule was usually applied. It was only applied exceptionally in Cameroon and Myanmar where senior convicted prisoners were employed as watchmen in the dormitories to assist the night duty prison officers.

Even though his lawyer subsequently applied for habeas corpus to the Supreme Court, this application was never adjudicated.