CCPR/C/70/D/547/1993 Page 18 Appendix Individual opinion by Mr. Martin Scheinin (partly dissenting) I concur with the main findings of the Committee in the case, related to article 27 of the Covenant. However, I express my dissent on paragraph 9.10 of the Views. In my opinion, the fact that an overall settlement of fisheries claims is found to be compatible with article 27, provided that the conditions of effective consultation and securing the sustainability of culturally significant forms of Maori fishing are met, does not exempt the State party from its obligations under article 14, paragraph 1. In my opinion, there has been a violation of the rights of the authors under article 14, paragraph 1, to the extent that: - the legislation in question had the effect of discontinuing pending lawsuits instituted by the same authors or persons duly representing them; - such discontinuation was not approved by the authors or other persons duly authorised to withdraw the lawsuit in question; and - the implementation of the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act or other measures provided by the State party have not resulted in those authors subject to discontinuation meeting the conditions above having received an effective remedy in accordance with article 2, paragraph 3, of the Covenant. M. Scheinin [signed] [Done in English, French and Spanish, the English text being the original version. Subsequently to be translated also in Arabic, Chinese and Russian as part of the Committee’s annual report to the General Assembly. ]