}
breach of Article 2. We can
same
Reference
the
abo arguet
in relation to Article 26; however,
the Human Rights Committee has expressed the that Article 26 is autonomous
view
In their case
they
decisions on individual cases
have said that
ever where a
State is not
confer a benefit, where this has
obliged to confer a
bee if it chooses to do so
it
must not be
discriminatory. In this case, the discriminatay
provisions are embodied
would seem to be a
distinct riste
lose
an
in legislation, There
that
HKG could
this point in any BOR action, if a Hke cout chose to follow the views of the MRC(although the interpretations of the Comment made by the the care antitled to great respect, we would not recomaty accept the
the coverent), as antwontative in the neave that they are legally binding wall States Parties to
н
4. with
and to the arguments in para
regard
to
8
me to be
of TUR, they do not seem relevant to the possibility of breaches of Arts 25 and 26; the declaration in
question relates only to Article I ICCAR.
I
would also doubt the wisdom of moving the debate into the realms of
✓ self-determination; an
issue beût avoided.
CODE 18-77