In November 2003, 104 of the 151 states parties to the ICCPR had ratified the Optional Protocol, only 45 of the 169 states parties to the ICERD had recognized the competence of the CERD under Article 14, and 54 out of 133 states parties to the CAT had recognized the competence of the CAT under Article 22. The newest individual complaints mechanism to come into force, the Optional Protocol to the CEDAW, had, by April 2004, received 60 ratifications out of 177 states party to the CEDAW. There is a provision for individual complaints to the MWC; however, no state has yet recognized the competence of the committee under Article 77. Under Article 14 of the ICERD both individuals and groups can file communications about alleged violations, whereas under the Optional Protocol to the ICCPR and Article 22 of the CAT, only individuals can submit complaints. However, the HRC will hear cases submitted by leaders or chiefs who are speaking on behalf of a group. The Optional Protocol to the CEDAW allows for communications from individuals and groups of individuals. NGOs may submit communications on behalf of victims with the victim’s consent. The Optional Protocol to the CEDAW also provides for committee members to initiate an inquiry if a committee member receives reliable information about grave or systematic violations. This confidential investigation may include a visit to the state (with the consent of the state). All individual complaint procedures are quasi-judicial in nature; as with legal cases, they require thorough preparation of the complaints as well as detailed presentation. All communications are considered by the committees in private, based on written submissions from the complainant and the government. It is only at the conclusion of a case that details are released publicly. If a communication contains particularly sensitive matters, the complainant may request that the committee protect their identity when the final result of the case is released. From the initial submission of a case, it may take several years before a final decision is produced. Specific guidelines for submitting communications to the different committees can be found at: http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu2/8/ question.htm but all communications must meet the following criteria: • the communication must be submitted by a person (or a group of persons in the case of CERD) alleging to be victim of a violation; • the author (applicant) must not be anonymous; • the alleged victim must live within the jurisdiction of a state that has ratified the respective treaty, recognized the competence of the treaty body to deal with complaints and not made any reservations that precludes the committee from considering that particular case; (see section 1 for more information about reservations); Communications should be sent to the secretariat of the respective committee at the OHCHR (see Annex 6.1 for contact details). The communication should normally be sent within six months of the exhaustion of domestic remedies, although not all committees require this. The committee first decides, based on the above criteria, if the communication is admissible, that is, if they have jurisdiction to consider it. (See Annex 6.3 for a model communication form.) The committee may make an interim protection order. This is a request that the state undertake a particular action or refrain from a particular action until the conclusion of the case. For example, the HRC has used this provision to make urgent requests to states not to carry out an execution or deportation while the case is under consideration by the committee. Interim measures are also possible where economic activity threatens the way of life of a minority community. Many states comply with the request but others do not. The HRC has stated that failure to respect an interim protection order is a ‘grave breach’ of a state’s obligations under the Optional Protocol, and that it ‘undermines the protection of covenant rights’, especially if the measures taken by the state are irreversible.35 However strong the HRC (or other committees’) condemnation of the failures to comply with interim protection orders, this cannot guarantee protection for all complainants. Communications should include all the relevant facts and a reference to the treaty provisions that have allegedly been violated. Documents that substantiate the allegations, copies of decisions of domestic courts and relevant national legislation should also be included. The committee will transmit the complaint to the government concerned with a request for its submissions on admissibility and/or merits (substance) of the case. Subsequently, the committee may request that the alleged victim and the government submit additional information and/or give observations on comments received from the other party. The author of the communication will always be informed about the content of replies and comments made by the government. When the committee makes a decision on the case, it will transmit its ‘views’ or ‘opinion’ to the applicant and the state at the same time. Where the committee finds a violation, the views will request the state to provide 22 MINORITY RIGHTS: A GUIDE TO UNITED NATIONS PROCEDURES AND INSTITUTIONS • the communication must not be incompatible with any provisions of the respective treaty or the UN Charter; • the same case must not be under consideration in another international procedure; and • all available and effective domestic remedies must have been exhausted.34