Examples of using Communication should be declared in English and their translations into Spanish
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
The State party therefore argues that, in accordance with article 3 of the Optional Protocol, the communication should be declared inadmissible on the grounds that the authors are availing themselves of the Covenant in a way that is clearly an abuse of its purpose.
the State party contends that the communication should be declared inadmissible for nonexhaustion of domestic remedies, since the author has not
complaint before the Committee, the State party submits that the communication should be declared inadmissible because the latter failed to establish a prima facie case for the purpose of admissibility under article 14 of the Convention.
the State party submits that the communication should be declared inadmissible for nonsubstantiation under article 2 of the Optional Protocol, since the author submitted insufficient
The Committee has noted the State party's contention that the communication should be declared inadmissible for non-substantiation because the author's allegations were formulated in an imprecise
the State party reiterates that the communication should be declared inadmissible under article 14 of the Convention
The State party submits that the author's complaint has not been sufficiently substantiated and that therefore the communication should be declared to be inadmissible as not constituting a"claim" within the meaning of articles 1
The State party submits that the communication should be declared inadmissible because the authors have failed to establish a prima facie case for the purpose of admissibility of their communication under articles 6,
The State party further considers that the communication should be declared inadmissible under article 4(2)(b) of the Optional Protocol because it is incompatible with the provisions of the Convention.
The State party reiterates therefore that the communication should be declared inadmissible in the light of its reservation to article 5(2) a.
available domestic remedies and there are no reasons to believe that such remedies would be unavailable or ineffective, the communication should be declared inadmissible.
Lastly, the State party submits that, for the above-mentioned reasons, the communication should be declared inadmissible under article 4(2)(d) of the Optional Protocol as an abuse of the right to submit a communication. .
As a result, the author did not exhaust domestic remedies and this part of the communication should be declared inadmissible under article 5, paragraph 2(b) of the Optional Protocol.
Since the complainant's claim under article 3 of the Convention fails to rise to the basic level of substantiation, the communication should be declared inadmissible as being manifestly unfounded, according to the State party.
The State party considers that the communication should be declared inadmissible ratione personae under article 14, paragraph 1, of the Convention because the petitioners are legal persons
The State party maintains that there are exemplary rulings by the Council of State in favour of applicants for"revision of judgement" and that the communication should be declared inadmissible for failure to exhaust domestic remedies.
On 5 February 2009, the State party submitted that the communication should be declared inadmissible, as its allegations are incompatible with the provisions of the Convention,
It claims that the communication should be declared inadmissible for non-substantiation, and refers in that regard to
the State party maintains that the complainant has not exhausted all available domestic remedies, and the communication should be declared inadmissible pursuant to article 22,
Since the author's claims under various articles of the Convention fail to rise to the basic level of substantiation, the communication should be declared inadmissible for lack of substantiation.
