The communication, dated 2 March 1989, is submitted by a newspaper company register&d in Trinidad. The company claims to be the victim of a violation by the Government of Tl'inidad and Tobago ot articles 2, 14 and 19 of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Riqht8. It is represented by couns.l.
The managing director of the ~umpany, Mr. D. C., states that the company publ~,hes 8 bi-weekly and a weekly newspaper, with wide circulation in Trinidad and throughout the Caribbean. As the material neces~ary Cor the pUblication of the paper has to be imported, the company requires the permission of the Central Bank of T[inida~ and Tobago to p~rchas.. the foreign currency needed for payment. Every year the Central Bank determinss th~ allocation of foreign exchange for newspapers published in the country, usually at 8 level which would allow the companies to purchase sufficient raw material for publication purposes. It is stated that in 1988 th. Central Bank allocated to the company an amount of foreign exchange wholly insufficient for the purpose of maintaining its aunual production and guaranteeing the publication of the newspapersl allocation for other publishers are said to have been sufficient. The company unsucceu fUlly sought ttpproval of the BMle amount:. of foreign exchange allocated to other publishers.
On 27 April 1988, the company requested the grant of a supplementary a1loc~tion from the Central Bank, which was refused. On 13 July 1988, it commenced a Constitutional Motion in the High Court of Trinidad and TobagD under section 14 of the Constit.ution, alleging that "the Central Bank acted lUi 611 un" uC lhe Stale and directly affected the supply of newsprint, nnd AccBliGori(lo of t.he company, thus vioJc!lting an integral part of the freedom tlf t.he pn'sR, (re:~dom IIf flxprflRBioll i'md the right to express political views". It is l:iubmi lted that thp Ilowspnpers published by the company have been cdtical oC the pol ides pUrl-well by the pn~sent Government of Trinidad, which has been in powel since December Illflh dlld t.hat. ItR a consequence the company has been discriminat.ed agaillst. Whil", t.hp. High Court. deemed the case to be urgent, it heard it on severa.1 sepArat.p. dnyll duriug tllf' period from September to December 1988, whon it reserved its :;ullqpmunt.. Silll'l' that day, the High Court has failed to produce l\ judgemellt. Decernht-'I l11AA, t.ht·
With relpect to the requirement vf e.haustion of domestic remedies, it is lubmitt~~ tbat there are no effeative remedL•• within the moaning of article 2 of the COVlfnant, 'incw the HIVh Court ha. failed to act e.peditioualy. It is st~t.d that the matter ha, not been .~nitt.d tor examination under anot.her procedure ot international inve.ti9atlon or .ettlement. AI
Btfore conlld.ring any claiml contained In a communication the Human Rights Committee mUlt, purluant to rule 87 of it. provi.loual rules of procedure, alcerta1n whether or not lt 18 adm1ulble under the Optional ProtoclJl t.o the Covenant.
The pre.ent communiaation 11 lubmitted on behalf of a cOlnpany incorporatod under the lawl of Trinidad Qnd Tobago. While counsel ha. indicated that Mr. D. C., the company', mana9ing director, ha. been duly "authorized to make the c:ompla.int. on bebaU at the company", it ill not indicated whether and to what extent h.ls individual rivht. under the Covenant have been violated by the events referred to in the communication. Under article 1 of the Optional Protocol, only individuals may lu.bmit • cOlMlunicat1on to the Hwnan Rights Committee. A. company incorpofnted under the law. of a State party to the Optional Protocol, as such, haA no Btnnding under article 1, re9ftrdle•• of whether its allegations appear to 1'ais8 issues under the Covenant.
The Human Rivht. Committee therefore decidell (a) The communication i. inadmissible; (b) Thh dechion shall be cOfMlunicated "0 the representative oC the alleged victim, and, for information, to the State party. Not•• AI The Secretariat has ascertained that the same matter has not baen 8ubmitte~ to the Inter-American Commislion on Human Rights.