Universal-MigrationHRlaw-PG-no-6-Publications-PractitionersGuide-2014-eng

MIGRATION AND INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW | 301
alleging to be victims, with their authorisation. 1287 Another issue is
whether third persons or entities may act on behalf of the individuals or
groups claiming to be victims, without their authorisation. Treaty bodies
generally allow for this on condition that the person or entity applying
must justify the absence of authorisation, for example, because the victim
is in a particular situation of risk or vulnerability which prevents him
or her from availing of the communication procedure, or because the
violation is so massive that it is impossible to obtain the authorisation
of all the people affected. 1288
The European Court of Human Rights receives applications from various
entities—individual persons, NGOs, or group of individuals—who
claim to be a victim (either direct or indirect) of the alleged violation. 1289
Applications cannot be anonymous, but the Court may grant leave to
anonymity of the claim in its communication to other parties or the
public, when the applicant has adduced sufficient reasons to justify this
departure from the rule. 1290
As for the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, any person
or group of persons, or any non-governmental entity legally recognised
in one or more Member States of the Organization of American
States (OAS), may lodge petitions containing complaints of violation
of this Convention by a State. 1291 In practice, however, the IACHR frequently
requests that the author of any complaint be either a victim
or a relative of a victim or have a mandate to act by the victim or by
1287 See, Rule 96(b), Rules of Procedure of the Human Rights Committee, UN Doc. CCPR/C/3/Rev.10,
11 January 2012 (CCPR Rules of Procedure); Article 2 OP-ICESCR; Rule 113(a), CAT Rules of
Procedure; Rule 91(b), CERD Rules of Procedure; Article 2 OP-CEDAW. See also, Rule 68(1),
CEDAW Rules of Procedure; Article 5, Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of
the Child on a Communications Procedure, not yet into force (OP-CRC-CP); Rule 13, Rules
of Procedure under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a
Communications Procedure, UN Doc. CRC/C/62/3, 16 April 2013 (CRC Rules of Procedure);
Rule 4, Provisional Rules of Procedure under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant
on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, UN Doc. E/C.12/49/3, 15 January 2013
(CESCR Provisional Rules of Procedure); Article 1, Optional Protocol to the Convention on the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities (OP-CRPD); Rule 69, Rules of Procedure of the Committee
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, UN Doc. CRPD/C/4/2, 13 August 2010 (CRPD Rules
of Procedure); Rule 68, Rules of Procedure of the Committee on Enforced Disappearances,
UN Doc. CED/C/1, 22 June 2012 (CED Rules of Procedure).
1288 See, Rule 96(b), CCPR Rules of Procedure; Article 2 OP-ICESCR; Rule 91(b), CERD Rules of Procedure;
and Article 2, OP-CEDAW. See also, Rule 68.1, CEDAW Rules of Procedure. See, Rule 13,
CRC Rules of Procedure: “communications may be submitted on behalf of the alleged victim(s)
without such express consent, provided that the author(s) can justify her/his/their action and
the Committee deems it to be in the best interests of the child. If possible, the alleged victim(s)
on whose behalf the communication is presented may be informed of the communication and
her/his/their views shall be given due weight in accordance with her/his/their age and maturity”.
1289 Article 34 ECHR.
1290 Rule 47.4, Rules of the Court, ECtHR, 1 January 2014, Strasbourg (ECtHR Rules of Procedure).
See for details of applications, the entire Rule 47.
1291 Article 44 ACHR.