The author states that the use of nuclear weapons is unlawful.

He submits that all charges against him were dismissed.

The author claims she has exhausted all available domestic remedies.

3.5 The author alleges various violations of article 14, paragraph 3.

3.4 The author alleges a violation of article 10, paragraphs 1 and 2 (a).

The author is essentially claiming before the Committee violations of rights of his company.

2.1 The author states that he served as a soldier towards the end of the Second World War.

The author further alleges that the State party has failed to initiate investigation of these cases.

Despite its apparent neutrality, section 122 is said to be by itself discriminatory.

The author states that her son had been a strong and healthy man when he was taken into custody.

The author claims that his brother is the victim of violations of his human rights by Libya.

The author states that this judge was dismissed from the Court in 1990.

2.1 The author states that he has been a member of the Zairian Armed Forces since 1982.

3.2 The author alleges a violation of article 14, paragraph 1, and the principle of equality before the courts.

5.4 The author argues that in any event the appointment of a process agent is a mere formality.

The first author further alleges a violation of his right to adversarial proceedings before the Constitutional Court.

The author also claims that he was not present at the hearing of his appeal before the Court of Appeal.

The author also contends that he was unable to obtain the attendance of witnesses other than his brother in law.

3.4 The author further claims to be a victim of article 18 juncto 5 of the Covenant.

2.2 The author claims that all her applications have been denied, without any lawful or legitimate grounds.

The author states that the men then threatened to kill him if he informed the police about the incident.

The State party notes that the author has failed to seek constitutional redress.

The author states that the health of her son has always been and still is precarious.

3.3 The author alleges that he was not cautioned by the police before his interrogation.

3.1 The author contends that he did not receive a fair and impartial trial.

2.5 The author further states that the Court of Appeal of Jamaica dismissed his appeal on 10 February 1988.

2.2 The author claims that the security police falsely suspected his brother of active involvement in politics.

3.7 The author submits that the same matter is not being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement.

2.7 The author states that judge Mijnssen had earlier been a colleague of judge Heemskerk at a University in Amsterdam.

The author states that he is submitting this communication on behalf of all unborn children in the State party in general.

3.4 The author further claims to have been beaten and ill treated during detention on death row, in violation of article 7 of the Covenant.

He claims to be a victim of violations by Finland of article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

6.9 The author claims that these crimes and abuses have not been investigated by the new Government of Nicaragua.

2.11 The author states that the same matter is not being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement.

The author claims that not a single request made by the defence and by his son were considered or granted by the court.

The author argues that his illiteracy and unawareness of the obligation to appoint such an agent should be taken into account.

With respect to his appeal, the author claims that his court appointed lawyer did not appear at all for the hearing.

The State party further contends that the author has failed to exhaust criminal and constitutional remedies.

The author further states that his daughter is still living with him and that she is in good health.

2.2 The author states that her son's trial was unfair and that he was unjustly convicted of murder.

2. The author states that on the evening of 9 July 1988, a contingent of soldiers conducted a search in a block of St. Catherine Prison.

13.2 The author has claimed that the absence of legal aid for the purpose of filing a constitutional motion itself constitutes a violation of the Covenant.

In this context, the State party contends that the author has failed to show in what manner section 70 (1) would operate in a discriminatory way.

As a result, the author claims he did not enjoy protection against private sector discrimination on the grounds of political opinion.

It also states that the author at no point raised this issue before the domestic courts or the Canadian Judicial Council.