ICCPR Case Digest

CCPR/C/126/D/2454/2014

Communication

2454/2014

Submission: 2014.04.28

View Adopted: 2019.07.26

S.G. v. Canada

Allegations of a violation of the right to a remedy, fair trial, privacy and freedom of expression for lengthy delay in processing of residence claim, inadmissible as manifestly unfounded

Substantive Issues
  • Effective remedy
  • Exhaustion of domestic remedies
  • Fair trial
  • Freedom of association
  • Freedom of expression
  • Non-discrimination
  • Privacy
Relevant Articles
  • Article 14.1
  • Article 17.2
  • Article 19.2
  • Article 2 - OP1
  • Article 2.3
  • Article 22
  • Article 26
  • Article 5.2 (b) - OP1
Full Text

Facts

The author is a Kurdish national, who alleges he left Turkey in 1990 fleeing persecution, arbitrary detention and torture by Turkish authorities due to his trade union membership and Kurdish ethnicity. Soon after arriving in Canada, the author co-founded the Kurdish Community and Information Centre, which is a cultural organization helping Turkish Kurds settle in Toronto.

The author applied for permanent residence which ws eventually granted, however there was a 13 year delay in processing which the author alleges is due to an assumption that he was a member of the PKK. The author alleges a violation of his rights under articles 2 (3), 14 (1), 17 (2), 19 (2), 22 and 26 of the Covenant owing to the state party deliberately failing to process his application for residence in a timely manner. 

Admissibility

  • Regarding article 17, the Committee found that the author had no sufficiently substantiated the claim that the investigation considered him to be a member of the PKK insubstantiated and therefore inadmissible.
  • Regarding articles 19(2) and 22, the Committee noted that the author decided of his own volition to limit his activities and expressions, and therefore this claim is unsubstantiated also.
  • Regarding article 26, the Committee noted that the author was granted numerous work permits during the time which his residence application was processing, and did not impact his inability to travel. The Committee therefore found this claim unsubstantiated also.

Merits

The Committee considered that due to the author ceasing his case at the domestic level, that they will not consider the author's claim with respect to article 14, neither regarding admissibility nor merits.

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