Czemu moj watek zniknal z tego forum?

[kaganowski]

Powtorzylem w nim moj post, zgoda, ale dla tego, ze jest on bardzo wazny i ze
to co robi balmy na forum POLONIA doprowadzic moze do procesu sadowgo!
Z Forum POLONIA:
1. Nie wazne, czy "balmy" jest platnym pracownikiem Agory SA, czy tylko tzw.
wolontariuszem. Wazne jest, ze otrzymal od Agory SA pewne uprawnienia, np. do
ingerencji w dzialanie forum "Gazety Wyborczej", a wiec Agora SA jest
odpowiedzialna za jego dzialanie, tak samo jak za dzialanie kazdego jej
pracownika, nie wazne czy zatrudnionego na umowe o prace, umowe-zlecenie, umowe
o dzielo, czy jako woluntariusza (tzw. vicarious responsibility).
2. Wola wiekszsosci uzytkownikow nie ma tu nic do rzeczy. Demokracja polega tez
na tolerowaniu mniejszosci (np. 2 miejsca w polskim sejmie dla reprezentatow
mniejszosci etnicznych, tu Niemcow zamieszkalych w Polsce). Bartrand Russell
czesto nalezal do owych mniejszosci, i to do niego, miedzy innymi, nauczylem sie
nie bac nalezec do mniejszosci. Nie dam sie zastraszyc, i nie pozwole, aby
odebrano mi podstawowe prawo, czyli prawo wyrazanie mej opinii, i to wyrazania
jej bez strachu bycia pozwanym do sadu czy stania sie ofiara cenzury prewencyjnej!
3. Jesli sie pisze list z pogrozkami, list ktory narusza prawo (blackmail czyli
sznataz), to publikacja takiego listu jest wrecz pozadana, lezy bowiem w
interesie spolecznym.
4. Czekam na oficjalne stanowisko Agory SA zanim podejme kolejne kroki.
Kagan(owski)

[anaiss]

Za dużo piszesz, dlatego nie traktują Cię poważnie.

[kaganowski]

A jak bym pisal za malo, to by mnie w ogole nie zauwazyli.
Potraktuja mnie powaznie, jak dostana pozew od sadu...

Zakaz krytyki Kanady i USA na forum POLONIA

[kaganowski]

I czemu nie wolno mi na forum POLONIA napisac o kontroli kapitalu USA nad
gospodarka Kanady?
forum.gazeta.pl/forum/72,2.html?f=44&w=30936998&wv.x=2&a=31175294

[balmy]

Klamiesz ja zwykle.
W tym poscie nie piszesz nic na temat Kanady i USA.
W poscie tym natomiast, ponownie lamiesz Netykiete Forum posadzajac innego
uzytkownika forum o szkalowanie Polski. Czynisz to bezpodstawnie co moze byc
odczytane jako oczernianie.

[kaganowski]

To ty klamiesz. Napisalem w nim, ze Kanada nie potrzebuje ludzi wyksztalconych,
tylko ludzi do lopaty, gora do koparki. A ty wyrzuciles ten post, wiec jak mam z
toba dyskutowac? I wyrzuciles CALY WATEK (prawie 100 postow) na temat twego
listu do mnie...

[kaganowski]

Za te szkalowanie mnie, tez odpowiesz przed sadem, razem z twymi protektorami... :(

[kaganowski]

Usuwajac z tego forum (POLONIA) watek na swoj wlasny temat, udowodniles "balmy",
ze to nie jest forum dyskusyjne, a twoj prywatny folwark. Ja zas na twym
folwarku za parobka ci sluzyc nie bede. Ale Agora niezle beknie za te twoja
samowole i lamanie prawa... :(

[Gość: Gosc]

Uzytkownik jest zaburzony psychicznie od ponad 12 lat. Dowody w posiadaniu.

[dekaganowski]

To je podaj. Tylko uwazaj, bo bekniesz za to, i zdrowo, razem z Agora SA i
Michnikiem!

[jot-23]

kaganowski napisał:


kagan,genialny,logicznie spojny wywod!

prawie jak tutaj:

www.airc.gov.au/decisionssigned/html/PR963979.htm
LOL!

[dekaganowski]

I co z tego? Nie umiesz czytac? Wyrok nieprawomocny i najnizszej instancji...
Nie ciesz sie za wczesnie i nie podawaj linkow do mych danych osobowych!

[jot-23]

dekaganowski napisał:

> I co z tego? Nie umiesz czytac? Wyrok nieprawomocny i najnizszej instancji...
> Nie ciesz sie za wczesnie i nie podawaj linkow do mych danych osobowych!

oo! to ten facet z linku to ty? nie mialem pojecia....ale jezeli mowisz ze tak
jest, to fajnie!

[dekaganowski]

To nie jest forum o mnie, a o forum GW. Zaloz siebie prywatne forum na moj
tetmat, jak cie on az tak fasynuje!

[jot-23]

dekaganowski napisał:

> I co z tego? Nie umiesz czytac?


good read!

"… I wasn't paid by Monash University, but I was promised."


normalnie lzy w oczach :)))

[dekaganowski]

Cieszysz sie zalosna kreaturo, ze ktos oszukal Polaka w Australii?

[jot-23]

dekaganowski napisał:

> Cieszysz sie zalosna kreaturo, ze ktos oszukal Polaka w Australii?


jest to taki troche tragiczny smiech... to w jaki sposob robisz z siebie
posmiewisko jest oczywiscie komiczne, ale robiac na przed powaznymi
instytucjami, niestety przyczyniasz sie do tworzenia negatywnej percepcji
polaka poza granicami kraju...

[dekaganowski]

Negatywna percepcje maja na zachodzie raczej ci, co nie potrafia dochodzic
swych praw...

[jot-23]

dekaganowski napisał:

> Negatywna percepcje maja na zachodzie raczej ci, co nie potrafia dochodzic
> swych praw...

tylko co to ma wspolnego z "dyskusja" powyzej? ty niczego nie dochodzisz, a
tylko chcesz wyludzic jakas jalmozne od Monashu.

[kagan_banita]

Zadna "jamuzne"! Pracowalem tam ponad 5 lat. Niczego za darmoche nie chce. A
poniewaz mnie ciagle banuja na forum Wyborczej, to pisz do mnie, jak chcesz, na
[e-mail]

[jot-23]

kagan_banita napisał:

> Zadna "jamuzne"! Pracowalem tam ponad 5 lat. Niczego za darmoche nie chce. A
> poniewaz mnie ciagle banuja na forum Wyborczej, to pisz do mnie, jak chcesz,
na
>
> [e-mail]

lol... nie wierze ze sie poddasz jakiemus tam banowaniu! widzisz to tak samo
jak z ta twoja "praca"... po pewnym czasie nie chcieli cie tam widziec, tak
samo jak tu na forum, nawet nie pobierajacego zadnych pieniedzy...masz po
prostu strasznie parszywy charakter...kagan, nikt cie nie lubi.

[kagan_banita]

Dyskusja schodzi na moj charakter? W Australii im kto ma bardziej parszywy
charakter, ten wyzej zachodzi... Nie potrafisz inaczej dyskutowac, tylko
obrazajac innych? Koncze te ma obecnosc na forum GW, bo jaki sens ma dyskusja z
tymi, co nie majac sily argumentu uzywaja argument sily i wyzwiska? Przeciez to
jest jasne, ze zaden!

[jot-23]

pa pa kagan

[attorney_bernie]

What d'you mean, mate?

I'm impressed with my attorney Bernie
I'm impressed with his influential friends
He's got very big connections
and I follow his directions
Bernie knows his way around
and so I always do what Bernie recommends...

[dekaganowski]

Prosze usunac linki do mych danych osobiwych z tego forum!

[dekaganowski]

Prosze tez usunac z forum linki do mych danych osobowych:
forum.gazeta.pl/forum/72,2.html?f=654&w=31174543&a=31184973
oraz posty jawnie mnie obrazjace:
forum.gazeta.pl/forum/72,2.html?f=44&w=31183999&a=31185145
forum.gazeta.pl/forum/72,2.html?f=44&w=31189217
forum.gazeta.pl/forum/73,46481,1540823.html?f=44&w=31190648&a=31190648&rep=1

OK. Get an AIRC suppression order

[Gość: Gosc]

www.austlii.edu.au/austlii/faq/#q1.10

[dekaganowski]

Po co? Czego sie mam wstydzic? Ze potrafie pOdac do sadu oszustow? WLASNIE
ZLOZYLEM APELACJE!

[Gość: attorney.bernie]

Okay, it is time for my monthly pro bono.
I shall explain this slowly, in words of few syllables:

If you want to prevent public discussion of an already published AIRC ruling,
delivered in an open court, at the conclusion of public proceedings, go get an
AIRC suppression order prohibiting any such discussion and/or any further
publication.

If you are exceptionally well represented, the court might even consider
temporary removal of some identifying data from the Australian Industrial
Relations Commission website. You should be aware that success rate in
applications for suppression orders is low.

Until and unless you have the suppression order, in writing, in your hand - get
lost. The ruling is public information; anyone in the world is fully entitled
to access it, quote, discuss in public, analyze, link, reference, slice and dice
that ruling by any and all means, in any way they like.

It is a basic feature of the system of justice of Australia that courts and
tribunals conduct their hearings in public, and that they publicly report their
reasons for judgment. There are only some very narrow exceptions to this
principle (victims of crime in certain types of offences or cases involving
children for example). Unless you are a minor, and/or you have been raped, these
exceptions are unlikely to apply to you.

Good luck with your appeal; that one will be public too. The university, of
course, has an option of asking the court to make any leave to appeal subject to
the lodgment of a major financial surety by you, to cover the university's legal
costs in the event you do not win the appeal. Any responsible counsel will be
recommending this to the university.

My opinion is that you will lose badly, with costs awarded against you.

This concludes my 10 minutes of pro bono work for the poor and disadvantaged for
the month of October 2005. You are free, as always, to pay some other lawyer an
exorbitant fee for an absolutely identical opinion.


=======



I'm impressed with my attorney Bernie
I'm impressed with his influential friends
He's got very big connections
and I follow his directions
Bernie knows his way around
and so I always do what Bernie recommends.

[kagan_banita]

Napisz na [e-mail] albo na adres powyzej, bo mnie wciaz banuja na
forum "GW". Nie mam czasu na ciagle zmiany IP.
Pozdr.

[kagan_banita]

Nie jestem tak glupi, aby placic prawnikom. Poniewaz oficjalnie nic nie mam,
przynajmniej w Australii, to zadnego "surety" ode mnie wyegzekwoac nie mozna.
To jest podstawowa sprawa w Australii: jak sie chesz procesowac, szczegolnie z
panstwem, to musisz oficjalnie nic nie miec, czyli miec mniej niz moze ci
zabrac komornik (szeryf) i zarabiac oficjalnie tylko tyle, ile wynosi minimalna
placa, aby ci szeryf na pensje nie wlazl. Ja te zabezpieczenia dawno temu
porobilem. Nie ludze sie, wiem ze przegram we wszystkich instancjach w
Australii, ze wzgekdu na skorumpowanie sedziow, ale licze na proces w Genewie.
Chodzi mi o to, aby ten proces trwal jak najdluzej, aby uniwersytet o mnie nie
zapomnial, i aby ten proces generowal jak najgorsze publicity dla Monash. I mam
nadzieje na wygrana w Genewie. Co do kosztow: jako ze nic nie mam, to nic ode
mnie zabrane byc nie moze. Natomiast nalezy mi sie legal aid: pro bono albo
oplacany przez panstwo. Mam do tego pelne prawo. Inaczej bede mial argument, ze
zawdzieczam przegrana odmowie przyznania mi owej pomocy prawnej. Masz wiec
szanse wystapic o takowa pomoc dla mnie, i przy okazji niezle zarobic. Proces
sie bedzie ciagnal latami, o czym dobrze wiesz. W 1szej instancji zabral on juz
klka lat. A to znaczy dobre zrodlo $$$ dla ciebie. I ewentualna wygrana dziele
sie pol na pol! A na tajemnicy mi nie zalezy. Nie wstydze sie tego, co robilem
na Monash. Wrecz przeciwnie: mam sie czym pochwalic. O zadne utajnienie tej
litigacji nie zamierzam wiec wystepowac...
Pozdrowka!
[e-mail]

[Gość: attorney.bernie]

I strongly suspect that my less-than-fully-functional Polish, inherited from my
immigrant parents, fails miserably when it comes to understanding your proposed
court strategy. It seems you have a kind of a peculiar approach to the problem.
But then, it may also well be that your thoughts are in fact crystal clear, and
it is myself who is missing their intended meaning because of the language gap.
My apologies if I misunderstand your line of argument due to my limited
competence in Polish. These are my reflections:


1. Do you, or do you not, want to suppress the publication of
www.airc.gov.au/decisionssigned/html/PR963979.htm ?

You seem to have castigated people linking to this address, but now you say:
"Nie wstydze sie tego co robilem na Monash. Wrecz przeciwnie: mam sie czym
pochwalic. O zadne utajnienie tej litigacji nie zamierzam wiec wystepowac..."

If this means what I think it means (ie. "I am not ashamed of what I did at
Monash. On the contrary, I have things to be proud of. I do not intend to apply
for any suppression orders in this litigation."), then I do not understand your
apparent sensitivity to the linking.

I have briefly glanced through the document, and other than showing your
unwisdom in going to court unrepresented, it is not particularly informative
either way. How long has this been going on? The transcript says your
relationship with the university ended on 31 December 2003, ie. less than two
years ago, so I am confused by your comment that the litigation has been ongoing
for several years (unless I misunderstand you again). Did you sue the university
before the expiry of your volunteer agreement, or on some other, unrelated
complaint? You also say elsewhere in the forum that you had worked for the
university for 5 years. They said in court that you conducted seven tutorials
there as a casual paid tutor, four in 2002 and three in 2003. How is this five
years of employment?

You complain bitterly of unfulfilled verbal promises: that's no one's fault but
your own; one must always put all agreements down in writing. When deals break
down, as they sometimes do, it is effectively impossible to argue anything,
years later, purely on the basis of unwritten promises. So let this be a lesson
to you.

2. I'm sorry, but I am afraid I completely fail to grasp the significance of
your sensitivity to the publication of court decisions. Publication is normal.
Why go to court if you have an objection to publication of the result? Do you
have any previous litigation history? Does it contain anything that could truly
damage your credibility? Other than that, I cannot think of anything that would
make you so combative on this.

It is not reasonable to expect in this day and age that any information
discussed in court will stay private (that is, if the court is open, and there
are no suppression orders in place). Also, if you object to publication, how do
you hope to generate negative publicity about your adversary? - if information
remains publicly unknown, then how cany you expect it to reflect negatively on
the public image of the other party?

In general, controlling information had been very difficult well before the
internet revolution, and became quite impossible after it, so you may as well
save your breath. Any complaint that someone has publicly repeated your personal
particulars available in a publicly available document, will be laughed out of
any court that I can think of. My advice is that you get over it.

3. You clearly misunderstand the notion of surety. Surety is not money to be
"extracted" by anyone from the plaintiff/applicant; it is a deposit that the
courts may, and often do, ask for. If this happens, then, in a nutshell: no
surety - no trial. A surety is deposited with the court as a guarantee for
costs. It is required where there is a reasonable fear that costs might not be
met by the party losing the litigation. If a surety is required, and you are
unable to come up with the money, the case will not proceed. If you lose the
case, the court may use your surety to pay the other side's costs.

4. I am not quite sure what Geneva-based court or tribunal you refer to? I
visit Switzerland reasonably regularly for business, but I am unaware of any
international court based in Geneva that could possibly have jurisdiction in
your case as described. Do you mean Strasbourg? That's in France, not
Switzerland; the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg has
jurisdiction over human rights complaints against governments, not private
litigation. Is your Australian university wholly owned by a European Government?
I do not think so. I also do not think Australia is a signatory to the European
Human Rights Convention; the role of ECHR in Strasbourg is to oversee
compliance with that convention. Or do you mean The Hague? That's in The
Netherlands; the International Court of Justice (ICJ), located there, arbitrates
only between sovereign states, not individuals and/or corporations.

5. Thank you for your kind offer to retain me in order to represent you in an
application for legal aid. Sorry, but I do not do this type of work at all, not
even for charity. Also, no offence, but neither you nor the legal aid people can
afford my fees. We almost certainly have very different definitions of what is a
good source of $ :-). In any event, my area of expertise is elsewhere, so
thanks but no thanks.

Okay, this was good for another 10 minutes of entertainment on my laptop, in yet
another airport lounge, but now I must fly, literally. One final piece of advice
for free: do not insult people unnecessarily. Lawyers and/or judges are not
universally corrupt. This sort of gratuitous insult puts people off for no good
reason, and does not advance your case. Should a court become aware of your
comments of such kind, you may go down, quite heavily, for contempt of the
court. Keeping your language civilised is a small price to pay if you hope to
get ahead.

This is probably the last you hear from me: I am not your attorney; I do not
need/want your money; I am time-poor and pretty much permanently jet-lagged; and
I have an over-full schedule. Consequently, my getting into any correspondence
with you is most unlikely. I might or might not drop in again to read this
fairly amusing forum, if/when I have time on my hands when flights are delayed,
but I do not feel like becoming a regular contributor here.

Good luck with your appeal.

Bernie

===========

I'm impressed with my attorney Bernie
I'm impressed with his influential friends
He's got very big connections
and I follow his directions
Bernie knows his way around
and so I always do what Bernie recommends

Prosze o kontakt na: [e-mail]

[Gość: Kagan]

Zabanowali mnie na forum. Pisze teraz przez PROXY, a to jest dosc powolne.

[kagan_banita]

In short:
1. Please write to me on address: [e-mail]
2. As to "surety". I know well how it works. But I argue, that demanding such a
surety limits access to the courts, and thus limits basic human rights. Thus I
consider demanfing such a surety as a kind of blackmail, and as a gross
violation of human rights and international treaties on this subject, which
were signed and ratified by Australia.
3. As to that COURT in Geneva: It is named The Office of the High Commissioner
for Human Rights (OHCHR). It is a department of the United Nations Secretariat.
It is mandated to promote and protect the enjoyment and full realization, by
all people, of all rights established in the Charter of the United Nations and
in international human rights laws and treaties. The mandate includes
preventing human rights violations, securing respect for all human rights,
promoting international cooperation to protect human rights, coordinating
related activities throughout the United Nations, and strengthening and
streamlining the United Nations system in the field of human rights. In
addition to its mandated responsibilities, the Office leads efforts to
integrate a human rights approach within all work carried out by United Nations
agencies. OHCHR's priorities are set by the General Assembly and are contained
in the Medium-Term Plan for 2002-2005 . The plan follows the 1993 Vienna
Declaration and Programme of Action, which was developed out of the 1993 World
Conference on Human Rights, and the Charter of the United Nations.
Details on:
www.ohchr.org/english/law/


GO TO: www.ohchr.org/english/

The Office of the High Commissioner

[kagan_banita]

Commission on Human Rights: www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/chr/index.htm
Individual complaints
www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/chr/special/complaints.htm
Individual complaints
Some special procedures mechanisms intervene directly with Governments on
specific allegations of violations of human rights that come within their
mandates. The intervention can relate to a human rights violation that has
already occurred, is ongoing, or which has a high risk of occurring. The
process, in general, involves the sending of a letter to the concerned
Government requesting information and comments on the allegation and that
preventive or investigatory action be taken.

The decision to intervene is at the discretion of the special procedure mandate
holder and will depend on the various criteria established by him or her. The
criteria will generally relate to: the reliability of the source and the
credibility of information received; the detail provided; and the scope of the
mandate itself. However, it must be emphasized that the criteria and the
procedure involved in responding to an individual complaint vary, so it is
necessary to submit a complaint in accordance with the specific requirements
established by each special procedure.

The following minimum information must be provided for all special procedures
in order for the complaint to be assessed:

Identification of the alleged victim(s);

Identification of the alleged perpetrators of the violation;

Identification of the person(s) or organization(s) submitting the communication
(this information will be kept confidential);

Date and place of incident

A detailed description of the circumstances of the incident in which the
alleged violation occurred.

Other details pertaining to the specific alleged violation may be required by
the relevant thematic mandates (e.g. past and present places of detention of
the victim; any medical certificate issued to the victim; identification of
witnesses to the alleged violation; any measures undertaken to seek redress
locally, etc.).

As a general rule, communications that contain abusive language or that are
obviously politically motivated are not considered. Communications should
describe the facts of the incident and the relevant details referred to above
clearly and concisely.

To facilitate the examination of reported violations, questionnaires relating
to several mandates are available to persons wishing to report cases of alleged
violations. It should, however, be noted that communications are considered
even when they are not submitted in the form of a questionnaire.

For specific information concerning the individual complaint procedures of each
special procedure mandate please consult the thematic mandates or country
mandates lists.

After consulting the requirements established by each mandate for the
submission of individual complaints, a complaint can be submitted by fax to +41
22 917 90 06, by e-mail to [e-mail], or by postal mail to:

OHCHR-UNOG
8-14 Avenue de la Paix
1211 Geneva 10
Switzerland

Please specify which special procedure mechanism the complaint is addressed to
in the subject line of the e-mail or fax, or on the cover of the envelope.

Several other individual complaint mechanisms have been established as part of
the international human rights system. For more information please visit the
Communications/Complaints section.

Complaints procedure

[kagan_banita]

www.ohchr.org/english/about/publications/docs/fs7.htm
Anyone may bring a human rights problem to the attention of the United Nations
and thousands of people around the world do so every year. What kinds of
complaints about alleged human rights violations does the United Nations
receive and how does it deal with them? This Fact Sheet explains the procedures
open to individuals and groups who want the United Nations to take action on a
human rights situation of concern to them.

It is through individual complaints that human rights are given concrete
meaning. In the adjudication of individual cases, international norms that may
otherwise seem general and abstract are put into practical effect. When applied
to a person's real-life situation, the standards contained in international
human rights treaties find their most direct application. The resulting body of
decisions may guide States, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and
individuals in interpreting the contemporary meaning of the texts concerned.

Individuals have only relatively recently acquired the means to vindicate their
rights at the international level. This Fact Sheet examines complaints that are
brought directly under international human rights treaties and complaints filed
through special procedures with the Commission on Human Rights and the
Commission on the Status of Women. Since the early 1970s international
complaint mechanisms have developed apace, and you can now bring claims to the
United Nations concerning violations of your rights under four of the six so-
called "core" human rights treaties. The four treaties concern: (i) civil and
political rights, set out in the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights; (ii) torture and cruel treatment, defined in the Convention against
Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; (iii)
racial discrimination, proscribed by the International Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; and (iv) sex discrimination,
defined in the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination
against Women. Each of these treaties establishes a quasi-judicial committee to
examine complaints. The complaint mechanisms are designed to be uncomplicated
and accessible to the layperson. You do not need to be a lawyer or even
familiar with legal and technical terms to bring a complaint before the bodies
concerned. On the contrary, the system is intended to be as straightforward as
possible.

The complaint mechanisms under individual treaties are complemented by
complaints procedure before the Commission on Human Rights and the Commission
on the Status of Women. These two procedures, involving political bodies
composed of State representatives, are among the oldest in the United Nations
system. They have a different focus from complaints under the international
treaties, which provide individual redress through quasi-judicial mechanisms.
Complaints to the Commissions focus on more systematic patterns and trends of
human rights violations and may be brought against any country in the world. As
with the procedures under the treaties, the Commission mechanisms seek to avoid
legal and technical terms and procedures and are open to everybody. The Fact
Sheet is divided into two parts. The first examines complaints procedure under
the individual treaties in greater detail and the second concentrates on the
Commissions. You should be aware that these mechanisms operate on the basis of
diverse mandates and procedures. As a result, each mechanism has a variety of
advantages and disadvantages. You may wish to compare them before electing
where your claim may be considered most fruitfully.

[kagan_banita]

Part 1: Complaints under the international human rights treaties
Overview
This part of the Fact Sheet explains the complaint mechanisms that are
currently available under the four international human rights treaties: the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention against
Torture, the International Convention on the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women. A human rights treaty is a formal document
negotiated by States, which imposes binding obligations to protect and promote
rights and freedoms on States parties that officially accept it (commonly
through "ratification"). The full texts of the treaties are accessible on the
web site of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
(OHCHR). [2]

The basic concept is that anyone may bring a complaint alleging a violation of
treaty rights to the body of experts set up by the treaty for quasi-judicial
adjudication. These "treaty bodies", as they are often called, are committees
composed of independent experts elected by States parties to the relevant
treaty. They are tasked with monitoring implementation in States parties of the
rights set forth in the treaties and with deciding on complaints brought
against those States. While there are some procedural variations between the
four mechanisms, their design and operation are very similar. Accordingly, what
follows is a general description of the typical features of a complaint under
any of the four treaties. Readers should then refer to the descriptions of the
individual treaties, which identify aspects differing from the general norm.

Against whom can a complaint under a treaty be brought?
A complaint under one of the four treaties can be brought only against a State
that satisfies two conditions. First, it must be a party to the treaty in
question, having ratified or otherwise accepted it. (To check whether a State
is a party to the treaty, consult the Treaty Body database on the OHCHR web
site. To access the database, click on Documents on the home page followed by
Treaty body database, Ratifications and reservations and States parties; then
check the relevant country. Alternatively, you may contact the Petitions Team
or the Division for the Advancement of Women, depending on the treaty, via the
contact details listed at the end of this part of the Fact Sheet.)

Second, the State party must have recognized the competence of the committee
established under the relevant treaty to consider complaints from individuals.
In the case of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, a
State recognizes the Committee's competence by becoming a party to a separate
treaty: the First Optional Protocol to the Covenant or the Optional Protocol to
the Convention. (To see the text of the Protocols and to check whether a State
is a party to either or both, consult the OHCHR web site as described above.)
In the case of the Convention against Torture and the International Convention
on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, States recognize the Committee's
competence by making a declaration to that effect under a specific article of
the Convention, articles 22 and 14 respectively. (To check whether a State has
made either of these declarations, access the OHCHR web site as described
above, clicking on Declarations on procedural articles once you have selected
the relevant State.)

Who can bring a complaint?
Anyone can lodge a complaint with a committee against a State that satisfies
these two conditions, claiming that his or her rights under the relevant treaty
have been violated. It is not necessary to have a lawyer prepare your case,
though legal advice usually improves the quality of the submissions. Be aware,
however, that legal aid is not provided under the procedures. You may also
bring a claim on behalf of another person on condition that you obtain his or
her written consent. In certain cases, you may bring a case without such
consent. For example, where parents bring cases on behalf of young children or
guardians on behalf of persons unable to give formal consent, or where a person
is in prison without access to the outside world, the relevant committee will
not require formal authorization to lodge a complaint on another's behalf.

What information do you need to provide in your complaint?
A complaint to a committee, also called a "communication" or a "petition", need
not take any particular form. While the model complaint form [3] and guidelines
[4] appended to this Fact Sheet (as annexes 1 and 2) focus on specific
information, any correspondence supplying the necessary particulars will
suffice. Your claim should be in writing and signed. [5] It should provide
basic personal information - your name, nationality and date of birth - and
specify the State party against which your complaint is directed. If you are
bringing the claim on behalf of another person, you should provide proof of
their consent, as noted above, or state clearly why such consent cannot be
provided.

You should set out, in chronological order, all the facts on which your claim
is based. A crucial requirement is that your account is as complete as possible
and that the complaint contains all information relevant to your case. You
should also detail the steps you have taken to exhaust the remedies available
in your country, that is steps taken before your country's local courts and
authorities. You should state whether you have submitted your case to another
means of international investigation or settlement. On these two matters, see
the section entitled "The admissibility of your case" below for further
important details. Lastly, you should state why you consider that the facts you
have outlined constitute a violation of the treaty in question. It is helpful,
though not strictly necessary, for you to identify the articles of the treaty
that have allegedly been violated. You should provide this information in one
of the secretariat's working languages.

In addition, you should supply all documents of relevance to your claims and
arguments, especially administrative or judicial decisions on your claim by
national authorities. It is also helpful if you provide copies of relevant
national laws. If they are not in an official language of the committee's
secretariat, consideration of your complaint will be speeded up if you can
arrange for a translation (either full or summary).

If your complaint lacks essential information, you will be contacted by the
secretariat with a request for the additional details.

When can you make a complaint under the human rights treaties?
In general, there is no formal time limit after the date of the alleged
violation for filing a complaint under the relevant treaties. It is usually
appropriate, however, to submit your complaint as soon as possible after you
have exhausted domestic remedies. Delay in submitting your case may also make
it difficult for the State party to respond properly. In exceptional cases,
submission after a protracted period may result in your case being considered
inadmissible by the committee in question.

[kagan_banita]

Overview
This part of the Fact Sheet explains the complaint mechanisms that are
currently available under the four international human rights treaties: the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention against
Torture, the International Convention on the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women. A human rights treaty is a formal document
negotiated by States, which imposes binding obligations to protect and promote
rights and freedoms on States parties that officially accept it (commonly
through "ratification"). The full texts of the treaties are accessible on the
web site of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
(OHCHR). [2]

The basic concept is that anyone may bring a complaint alleging a violation of
treaty rights to the body of experts set up by the treaty for quasi-judicial
adjudication. These "treaty bodies", as they are often called, are committees
composed of independent experts elected by States parties to the relevant
treaty. They are tasked with monitoring implementation in States parties of the
rights set forth in the treaties and with deciding on complaints brought
against those States. While there are some procedural variations between the
four mechanisms, their design and operation are very similar. Accordingly, what
follows is a general description of the typical features of a complaint under
any of the four treaties. Readers should then refer to the descriptions of the
individual treaties, which identify aspects differing from the general norm.

Against whom can a complaint under a treaty be brought?
A complaint under one of the four treaties can be brought only against a State
that satisfies two conditions. First, it must be a party to the treaty in
question, having ratified or otherwise accepted it. (To check whether a State
is a party to the treaty, consult the Treaty Body database on the OHCHR web
site. To access the database, click on Documents on the home page followed by
Treaty body database, Ratifications and reservations and States parties; then
check the relevant country. Alternatively, you may contact the Petitions Team
or the Division for the Advancement of Women, depending on the treaty, via the
contact details listed at the end of this part of the Fact Sheet.)

Second, the State party must have recognized the competence of the committee
established under the relevant treaty to consider complaints from individuals.
In the case of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, a
State recognizes the Committee's competence by becoming a party to a separate
treaty: the First Optional Protocol to the Covenant or the Optional Protocol to
the Convention. (To see the text of the Protocols and to check whether a State
is a party to either or both, consult the OHCHR web site as described above.)
In the case of the Convention against Torture and the International Convention
on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, States recognize the Committee's
competence by making a declaration to that effect under a specific article of
the Convention, articles 22 and 14 respectively. (To check whether a State has
made either of these declarations, access the OHCHR web site as described
above, clicking on Declarations on procedural articles once you have selected
the relevant State.)

Who can bring a complaint?
Anyone can lodge a complaint with a committee against a State that satisfies
these two conditions, claiming that his or her rights under the relevant treaty
have been violated. It is not necessary to have a lawyer prepare your case,
though legal advice usually improves the quality of the submissions. Be aware,
however, that legal aid is not provided under the procedures. You may also
bring a claim on behalf of another person on condition that you obtain his or
her written consent. In certain cases, you may bring a case without such
consent. For example, where parents bring cases on behalf of young children or
guardians on behalf of persons unable to give formal consent, or where a person
is in prison without access to the outside world, the relevant committee will
not require formal authorization to lodge a complaint on another's behalf.

[kagan_banita]

What information do you need to provide in your complaint?
A complaint to a committee, also called a "communication" or a "petition", need
not take any particular form. While the model complaint form [3] and guidelines
[4] appended to this Fact Sheet (as annexes 1 and 2) focus on specific
information, any correspondence supplying the necessary particulars will
suffice. Your claim should be in writing and signed. [5] It should provide
basic personal information - your name, nationality and date of birth - and
specify the State party against which your complaint is directed. If you are
bringing the claim on behalf of another person, you should provide proof of
their consent, as noted above, or state clearly why such consent cannot be
provided.

You should set out, in chronological order, all the facts on which your claim
is based. A crucial requirement is that your account is as complete as possible
and that the complaint contains all information relevant to your case. You
should also detail the steps you have taken to exhaust the remedies available
in your country, that is steps taken before your country's local courts and
authorities. You should state whether you have submitted your case to another
means of international investigation or settlement. On these two matters, see
the section entitled "The admissibility of your case" below for further
important details. Lastly, you should state why you consider that the facts you
have outlined constitute a violation of the treaty in question. It is helpful,
though not strictly necessary, for you to identify the articles of the treaty
that have allegedly been violated. You should provide this information in one
of the secretariat's working languages.

In addition, you should supply all documents of relevance to your claims and
arguments, especially administrative or judicial decisions on your claim by
national authorities. It is also helpful if you provide copies of relevant
national laws. If they are not in an official language of the committee's
secretariat, consideration of your complaint will be speeded up if you can
arrange for a translation (either full or summary).

If your complaint lacks essential information, you will be contacted by the
secretariat with a request for the additional details.

When can you make a complaint under the human rights treaties?
In general, there is no formal time limit after the date of the alleged
violation for filing a complaint under the relevant treaties. It is usually
appropriate, however, to submit your complaint as soon as possible after you
have exhausted domestic remedies. Delay in submitting your case may also make
it difficult for the State party to respond properly. In exceptional cases,
submission after a protracted period may result in your case being considered
inadmissible by the committee in question.

The procedure
If your complaint contains the essential elements outlined above, your case is
registered, that is to say formally listed as a case for consideration by the
relevant committee. You will receive advice of registration.

At that point, the case is transmitted to the State party concerned to give it
an opportunity to comment. The State is requested to submit its observations
within a set time frame. The two major stages in any case are known as
the "admissibility" stage and the "merits" stage. The "admissibility" of a case
refers to the formal requirements that your complaint must satisfy before the
relevant committee can consider its substance. The "merits" of the case are the
substance, on the basis of which the committee decides whether or not your
rights under a treaty have been violated. These stages are described in greater
detail below. The time within which the State is required to respond to your
complaint varies between procedures and is also specified below in the sections
dealing with them individually.

Once the State replies to your submission, you are offered an opportunity to
comment. Again, the time frames vary somewhat between procedures (see below for
details). At that point, the case is ready for a decision by the relevant
committee. If the State party fails to respond to your complaint, you are not
disadvantaged. Reminders are sent to the State party and if there is still no
response, the committee takes a decision on your case on the basis of your
original complaint.

[kagan_banita]

Special circumstances of urgency or sensitivity
Each committee has the facility to take urgent action where irreparable harm
would otherwise be suffered before the case is examined in the usual course.
The basis for such interim action by individual committees is set out below for
each procedure. The common feature is that the committee in question may, at
any stage before the case is considered, issue a request to the State party for
what are known as "interim measures" in order to prevent any irreparable harm.
Typically, such requests are issued to prevent actions that cannot later be
undone, for example the execution of a death sentence or the deportation of an
individual facing a risk of torture. If you wish the committee to consider a
request for interim measures, it is advisable to state this explicitly. In any
case, you should identify as carefully and comprehensively as possible the
reasons why you consider such action to be necessary.

If there are particularly sensitive matters of a private or personal nature
that emerge in the complaint, you may request that the committee suppress
identifying elements in its final decision so that your identity does not
become public. The committee may also, of its own motion, suppress these or
other matters in the course of consideration of the complaint.

The admissibility of your case
Before the committee to which you have brought your case can consider its
merits or substance, it must be satisfied that the claim meets the formal
requirements of admissibility. When examining admissibility, the committee may
consider one or several of the following factors:

· If you are acting on behalf of another person, have you obtained
sufficient authorization or are you otherwise justified in doing so?

· Are you (or the person on whose behalf you are bringing the
complaint) a victim of the alleged violation? You must show that you are
personally and directly affected by the law, policy, practice, act or omission
of the State party which you claim has violated or is violating your rights. It
is not sufficient simply to challenge a law or State policy or practice in the
abstract (a so-called actio popularis) without demonstrating how you are
individually a victim of the law, policy or practice in question.

· Is your complaint compatible with the provisions of the treaty
invoked? The alleged violation must relate to a right actually protected by the
treaty. If you have filed a complaint under the Optional Protocol to the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, for example, you cannot
claim a violation of the right to property since the Covenant does not protect
that right. In such a case, your claim would be, in legal terms, inadmissible
ratione materiae.

· Is your complaint sufficiently substantiated? If the relevant
committee considers, in the light of the information before it from all sides,
that you have not sufficiently developed the facts of your complaint or the
arguments for a violation of the Covenant, it may reject the claim as
insufficiently substantiated for the purposes of admissibility. This ground is
analogous to the rejection of a case by other courts, international and
domestic, as "manifestly ill-founded".

· Does your complaint relate to events that occurred prior to the entry
into force of the complaint mechanism for your State? As a rule, a committee
does not examine complaints dating from a period prior to this date and your
complaint is regarded, in legal terms, as inadmissible ratione temporis. There
are, however, exceptions. In cases where the effects of the event in question
have extended into the period covered by the complaint mechanism, a committee
may consider the overall circumstances. Further details are given in the
sections on individual procedures.

· Have you exhausted all domestic remedies? A cardinal principle
governing the admissibility of a complaint is that you must, in general, have
exhausted all remedies in your own State before bringing a claim to a
committee. This usually includes pursuing your claim through the local court
system, and you should be aware that mere doubts about the effectiveness of
such action do not, in the committees' view, dispense with this requirement.
There are, however, limited exceptions to this rule. If the exhaustion of
remedies would be unreasonably prolonged, or if they would plainly be
ineffective (if, for example, the law in your State is quite clear on the point
at issue) or if the remedies are otherwise unavailable to you (owing, for
example, to denial of legal aid in a criminal case), you may not be required to
exhaust domestic remedies. You should, however, give detailed reasons why the
general rule should not apply. On the issue of exhaustion of domestic remedies,
you should describe in your original complaint the efforts you have made to
exhaust local remedies, specifying the claims advanced before the national
authorities and the dates and outcome of the proceedings, or alternatively
stating why any exception should apply.

· Is your claim an abuse of the complaints process? In rare cases, the
committees may consider a case to be a frivolous, vexatious or otherwise
inappropriate use of the complaints procedure and reject it as inadmissible,
for example if you bring repeated claims to the committee on the same issue
although they have already been dismissed.

· Is your complaint being examined under another mechanism of
international settlement? If you have submitted the same claim to another
treaty body or to a regional mechanism such as the Inter-American Commission on
Human Rights, the European Court of Human Rights or the African Commission on
Human and Peoples' Rights, [6] the committees cannot examine your complaint,
the aim being to avoid unnecessary duplication at the international level. This
is another issue of admissibility that you should cover in your original
complaint, describing any claims you have made and specifying the body to which
you applied, the date and the outcome.

· Is your complaint precluded by a reservation the State has made to
the Optional Protocol? [7] A State may have entered a procedural reservation to
the complaint mechanism limiting the committee's competence to examine certain
communications. For example, States may preclude a committee's consideration of
claims that have in the past been considered by another international
mechanism. In very rare cases, a committee may decide that a particular
reservation is impermissible and consider the communication notwithstanding the
purported reservation. (The text of reservations may be found in the Treaty
Body database described above.)

If you think there is a risk that your claim may be considered inadmissible on
one of these grounds, it is helpful to present your counterarguments in the
initial complaint. In any event, the State party, when responding to your
complaint, will probably argue that your case is inadmissible if it considers
that one of these grounds may apply. You will then be able to present your view
when commenting on the State party's submissions.

[kagan_banita]

The merits of your case
Once a committee decides your case is admissible, it proceeds to consider the
merits of your complaint, stating its reasons for concluding that a violation
has or has not occurred under the various articles it considers applicable. A
number of States have also entered substantive reservations that may limit the
scope of the human rights obligations they assume under the treaties. [8] (The
text of any reservations or declarations entered may be accessed in the Treaty
Body database on the OHCHR web site as described above. Be sure to check that a
reservation has not been subsequently withdrawn, as in such cases the State
party will have accepted, in the meantime, the full obligation imposed by the
relevant article.) In most cases, a committee will decline to consider
complaints falling within areas covered by a reservation, though in exceptional
circumstances, as noted above, it may find a reservation impermissible and
consider the case despite the purported reservation.

To form an idea of what a committee considers to be the scope of the rights
contained in the treaty for which it is responsible, you may look at its
previous decisions, its so-called "General Comments" expanding on the meaning
of various articles, and its concluding observations on reports submitted
periodically by States parties to the treaty concerned. These documents are
accessible on the OHCHR web site through the Treaty Body database. There are
also numerous academic articles and textbooks on the jurisprudence of the
various committees that may be of assistance.

Consideration of your case
The committees consider each case in closed session. Although some have
provisions for oral components of proceedings in their rules of procedure, [9]
the practice has been to consider complaints on the basis of the written
information supplied by the complainant and the State party. Accordingly, it
has not been the practice to receive oral submissions from the parties or audio
or audio-visual evidence (such as audio cassettes or videotapes). Nor do the
committees go beyond the information provided by the parties to seek
independent verification of the facts. It follows that they do not consider
briefs provided by third parties (often called amicus briefs).

Once the committee takes a decision on your case, it is transmitted to you and
the State party simultaneously. One or more committee members may append a
separate opinion to the decision if they come to a different conclusion from
the majority or perhaps reach the same conclusion but for different reasons.
The text of any final decision on the merits of your case or of a decision of
inadmissibility will be posted on the OHCHR's web site as part of the
committee's jurisprudence.

What happens once a committee decides your case?
It should be noted at the outset that there is no appeal against committee
decisions and that, as a rule, the decisions are final. What happens to your
case subsequently depends on the nature of the decision taken.

When the committee decides that you have been the victim of a violation by the
State party of your rights under the treaty, it invites the State party to
supply information within three months on the steps it has taken to give effect
to its findings. See the descriptions of the specific procedures for further
details.


When the committee decides that there has been no violation of the treaty in
your case or that your complaint is inadmissible, the process is complete once
the decision has been transmitted to you and the State party.


When the committee considers your case admissible, either in general or with
reference to specific claims or articles, the general procedure set out above
applies. That is to say, the State party is requested to make submissions on
the merits within a specific time frame. You then have a period for comment on
the submissions, following which the case is usually ready for consideration by
the committee. See under the particular procedures for further details.

Reszta na <a href="http://www.ohchr.org/english/" target="_blank"&

[kagan_banita]

www.ohchr.org/english/about/publications/docs/fs7.htm#introduction
Napisz do mnie na [e-mail], bo to nie jste rozmowa na publiczne forum!
I tak dalem ci spory a darmowy wyklad na temat International Law in area Human
Rights...
Pozdr.
Kagan

[attorney_bernie]

Thanks! It will take some time to digest all of this!

I'm impressed with my attorney Bernie
I'm impressed with his influential friends
He's got very big connections
and I follow his directions
Bernie knows his way around
and so I always do what Bernie recommends...

???

[valdivia]

Wyklad??? To przeciez zwykle paste and copy... Jesli tak pracowales na tym
australijskim uniwersytecie to nic dziwnego, ze sie to skonczylo tak jak sie
skonczylo... :)
v.

Wyjatkowa podlosc "valdivi", cenzorki forum...

[kagan_banita]

... turystyka!
1. Atakuje mnie, wiedzac ze zostalem zabanowany, a wiec mam zmniejszona
mozliwosc odpowiedzi na jej wysoce nieetyczne ataki ad personam, spowodowane
pisaniem przeze mnie prawdy o tzw. zachodzie na "jej" forum. Jak widac po tym,
co sie dzieje we Francji, to mialem racje.
2. Atkuje mnie nieuczciwie, bowiem WYKLAD to najczesciej powtorzenie znanych
uprzednio wiadomosci, przekazanie ich innym. 90% wykladow to wlasnie takie COPY
& PASTE: przekazywanie informacji, ktore nie musza pochodzic z oryginalnego
dorobku badawczego wykladowcy. W ten sposob, jak nie "valdivia" zaatakowala, to
nalezaloby wyrzucic z roboty 99% wykladowcow np. matematyki, bo oni przeciez
przekzauja studentom glownie, jak nie wylacznie, cudza wiedze: Newtona, Gaussa,
Pascala, Banacha i innych, na ogol niezyjacych juz matematykow... :(

[Gość: Ajdzent001]

No coz, taka jest natura cenzorow. Ludzie z moralnym kregoslupem nigdy
cenzorami nie zostaja... ;)

[valdivia]

Znowu sam sobie odpowiadasz? Rozdwojenie jazni? Wspolczuje... To ciezka choroba!
PdV

[kagan_banita]

Czemu moj post, krytykujacy chamski komentarz Valdivii na temat mego zdrowia
psychicznego zniknal bez sladu?

[kagan_banita]

kagan_banita napisał: Czemu moj post, krytykujacy chamski komentarz Valdivii na
temat mego zdrowia psychicznego zniknal bez sladu?
- No wlasnie, CZEMU?

[kagan_banita]

No wlasnie? CZEMU?

[kagan_banita]

Czemu wciaz kasuje ona me posty?

[Gość: Valdivia]

Kasuje bo moge!

Bed cıac ıle chce!

[Gość: Valdıvıa]

Sam Adas mı na to pozwolıl w ramach walkı z cenzura na Bıalorusı!

[Gość: Cenzura]

Milego ciecia!

[Gość: Moderator]

O co ci wlasciwie chodzi?

[qqulka]

A kto tu cenzuruje cenzorow?

[kagan_banita]

PS: To, ze kazdy skorumpowany prawnik, a takich jest ponad 99%, ma te sama
opinie, o niczym jeszcze nie swiadczy!
;)

Pisz na [e-mail]

[kagan_banita]

I zajrzyj na:
www.ohchr.org/english/about/publications/docs/fs7.htm#introduction

[attorney_bernie]

OK! I'll certainly write to you.

I'm impressed with my attorney Bernie
I'm impressed with his influential friends
He's got very big connections
and I follow his directions
Bernie knows his way around
and so I always do what Bernie recommends...

[attorney_bernie]

Czekam na twa odpowiedz re R. J.

[attorney_bernie]

Interesting!

I'm impressed with my attorney Bernie
I'm impressed with his influential friends
He's got very big connections
and I follow his directions
Bernie knows his way around
and so I always do what Bernie recommends...

[moderator_polonii]

Bo sie mi nie podobal!

[Gość: Cenzor]

Ja tez lubie cenzurowac Kagana!

[Gość: Moderator_Polonii]

I ja tez Kagana nie lubie, wiec go tne!

[Gość: Pytek]

A czemu go nie lubisz?

[Gość: Brytyjczyk]

Czemu zaden z adminow nie odpowie na pytania zadane w tym watku?

[Gość: Brytyjczyk]

Czemu zaden z adminow nie odpowie na pytania zadane w tym watku?

[Gość: UKMAN]

No wlasnie. Czemu?

[qqulka]

Czemu moderatorzy unikaja odpowiedzi na pytania zadane na tym watku?

[Gość: Free_Servıce]

Nıgdy sıe tego nıe dowıesz!

[aussie_mate]

A to niby czemu?

[australczyk]

Podpadles cenzorom!

[scotch_jew]

Za nicka!