ICCPR Case Digest

CCPR/C/127/D/2739/2016

Communication

2739/2016

Submission: 2014.02.25

View Adopted: 2019.11.08

M.S. v. Netherlands

Allegation of violation of right to access a court, inadmissible as insufficiently substantiated

Substantive Issues
  • Effective remedy
  • Equality before the law
  • Principle of legality
  • Right to appeal
Relevant Articles
  • Article 14.1
  • Article 14.5
Full Text

Facts

The author is a national of the Netherlands, who claimed that the state party has violated his rights under article 14(1) and (5) of the Covenant. In May 2008 the author was was convicted of making a verbal threat and sentenced to 16 days imprisonment. The author contested the decision and following a number of administrative issues, the higher courts declined the review of the case. 

The author claims that the right to have an access to a court and to an effective review by a higher tribunal have been violated by the state party.

Admissibility

The Committee found that the author had not substantiated that the missing part of the memorandum of oral pleadings that was drafted and submitted by his own representative was essential to formulate his grounds for cassation in respect of the length of proceedings. On this basis, the Committee was not in a position to conclude that the domestic courts acted arbitrarily or that their decision amounted to a denial of justice.

Accordingly, the Committee found the communication insufficiently substantiated for the purposes of admissibility and declared it inadmissible under article 2 of the Optional Protocol.

Rules of Procedure of the Human Rights Committee

Rules of Procedure of the Human Rights Committee CCPR/C/3/Rev.10

Arabic | Chinese | English | French | Russian | Spanish

CCPR NGO Participation

Documents adopted by the Human Rights Committee (March 2012)

English | French | Spanish | Russian | Handbook

CCPR NHRI Participation

Documents adopted by the Human Rights Committee (November 2012)

English | French | Spanish | Russian | Arabic | Chinese