Minority rights focus in the United Nations 61 As a rule, committees consider the admissibility and merits of a communication jointly with its author. However, a committee may decide either at its own initiative or having received information from the State party concerned, pursuant to its rules of procedure, to separate consideration of the admissibility and merits of a case. The committee examines the communication in the light of all available information. Committee deliberations are confidential, and there is no opportunity to call witnesses or to engage the State concerned in oral debate, as there would be in a domestic court. The committee then forms its conclusion (depending on the committee, this may be called a “view”, “decision” or “opinion”), which is transmitted to the author of the communication and the State party, together with any suggestions and recommendations the committee may wish to make. In the event that a violation is found, the State party is invited to inform the committee in due course of the action it has taken in conformity with the committee’s suggestions and recommendations. All decisions of the committee are made public and reproduced in the committee’s annual report. Committee conclusions are not legally binding judgements or decisions.68 However, each one represents an authoritative determination by the organ, established under the treaty itself, charged with the interpretation of that treaty. Ignoring a committee’s conclusions exposes a State to domestic and international criticism for not complying with its international obligations. Most committees have established a follow-up procedure in order to monitor the implementation of its conclusions where it has found a violation of the relevant treaty by the State party. This procedure can facilitate compliance with the committee’s recommendations, which has sometimes been weak. Indeed, the mere fact that a well-founded case is brought to a committee may encourage a State to re-examine its policies or begin dialogue with minority representatives. For minority rights activists it would be instructive to examine procedures related to the following communications: Complaint No. 161/2000 submitted under the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment by Hajrizi Dzemajl and 64 other Yugoslav citizens of Roma ethnicity; Communication No. 31/2003 submitted under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination by Ms. L. R. and 26 other Slovak citizens of Roma ethnicity; and Communication No. 4/2004 submitted under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women by Ms A. S. of Hungary. Urgent cases (Request for interim measures) Each committee is competent to take urgent action where there is an imminent risk of serious and irreparable harm to the alleged victim before the case is considered by the committee. The alleged victim may ask that the committee adopt interim measures and immediately request the State party to take such appropriate and concrete measures of protection as may be required to avoid irreparable damage to the alleged victim while the communication is under consideration by the committee. Such a course will be adopted only when there is specific information about an imminent risk, for example, a pending execution or deportation. (Reporting urgent cases under the special procedures mechanisms is discussed in chapter IV.) The Human Rights Committee has stated, “The character of the views of the Committee is further determined by the obligation of States parties to act in good faith, both in their participation in the procedures under the Optional Protocol and in relation to the Covenant itself. A duty to cooperate with the Committee arises from an application of the principle of good faith to the observance of all treaty obligations.” See general comment No. 33 (2008) on the obligations of States Parties under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, para. 15. 68