Communication No. 425/2010(I.A.F.B. v. Sweden) concerned a national of Algeria, who claimed that his removal to his country of origin would constitute a violation by Sweden of article 3 of the Convention.
In case No. 1833/2008(X. v. Sweden), the author claimed that his forcible return to Afghanistan would amount to a violation by Sweden of his rights under articles 6 and 7 of the Covenant.
At its thirtyfifth session, the Committee declared inadmissible complaints Nos. 242/2003(R.T. v. Switzerland), 247/2004(A.H. v. Azerbaijan) and 250/2004(A.H. v. Sweden).
It further regrets the lack of full implementation of the Views of the Human Rights Committee in Alzery v. Sweden, including the recommended remedies(arts. 3 and 14).
Also at its thirtyeighth session, the Committee decided to declare inadmissible complaint No. 305/2006(A.R.A. v. Sweden), which concerned claims under article 3 of the Convention.
Complaint No. 424/2010(M.Z.A. v. Sweden) concerned a national of Azerbaijan, born in 1957, who claimed that his deportation to Azerbaijan would constitute a breach by Sweden of article 3 of the Convention against Torture.
Also at its thirtyninth session, the Committee adopted Views on complaints Nos. 269/2005(Ali Ben Salem v. Tunisia), 297/2006(Sogi v. Canada), 299/2006(Iya v. Switzerland), 303/2006(T.A. v. Sweden).
In the case of the Swedish motorship" Kronprins Gustaf Adolf"(Sweden v. United States) of 18 July 1932, the arbitrator E. Borel said that"… a renunciation to a right or a claim is not to be presumed.
中文
Bahasa indonesia
日本語
عربى
Български
বাংলা
Český
Dansk
Deutsch
Ελληνικά
Español
Suomi
Français
עִברִית
हिंदी
Hrvatski
Magyar
Italiano
Қазақ
한국어
മലയാളം
मराठी
Bahasa malay
Nederlands
Norsk
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Slovenský
Slovenski
Српски
Svenska
தமிழ்
తెలుగు
ไทย
Tagalog
Turkce
Українська
اردو
Tiếng việt