     judicial procedures aimed at determining rights and obligations pertaining to the areas of contract, property and torts in the area of private law; equivalent notions in the area of administrative law such as the termination of employment of civil servants for other than disciplinary reasons;604 the determination of social security benefits;605 the pension rights of soldiers;606 procedures regarding the use of public land607 or the taking of private property. 58. In addition, it may cover other procedures which, however, must be assessed on a case by case basis in the light of the nature of the right in question.608 59. If the national law does not provide any entitlement to the individual, then there is no ‘suit at law’.609 So the Human Rights Committee has said the right did not apply where there was no right,610 for example,    to be promoted to a higher position in the civil service; 611 to be appointed as a judge;612 to have the death penalty commuted by an executive body.613 60. Similarly the right will not apply if the measures taken against them are subject to a higher administrative body. For example:        Tax obligations and assessments of tax; Education rights; Right to stand for public office and the right to vote; Right of political parties to continue their activities; Refusal to issue a passport; Right of access to information, unless such information must be disclosed pursuant to Article 8614, or where such information may assist in establishing a claim for damages615; Imposition of reporting restrictions on the press preventing reporting of a public trial; 604 Communication No. 441/1990, Casanovas v. France, 19 July 1994, para. 5.2. Communication No. 454/1991, Garcia Pons v. Spain, para. 9.3 606 Communication No. 112/1981, Y.L. v. Canada, para. 9.3. 607 Communication No. 779/1997, Äärelä and Näkkäläjätvi v. Finland, 24 October 2001, paras. 7.2 – 7.4. 608 Human Rights Committee General Comment No.32, CCPR/C/GC/32, para 16. 609 Kolanowski v Poland, Human Rights Committee, Communication 837/1998, UN Doc.CCPR/C/78/D/837/1998, (2003), para 6.4; Fernandez v Spain, Human Rights Committee, Communication 1396/2005, UN Doc.CCPR/C/85/D/1396/2005 (2005), para 6.3. See also before the European Court of Human Rights, Roche v UK, [2005] ECHR 926, paras 116-121. 610 General Comment No.32, CCPR/C/GC/32 (2007), para 17. 611 Communication No. 837/1998, Kolanowski v. Poland, para. 6.4. 612 Communications No. 972/2001, Kazantzis v. Cyprus, para. 6.5; No. 943/2000, Jacobs v. Belgium para 8.7, and No. 1396/2005, Rivera Fernández v. Spain, para. 6.3. 613 Human Rights Committee Communication No. 845/1998, Kennedy v. Trinidad and Tobago, para. 7.4. 614 Gaskin v UK 615 McGinley & Egan v UK 605 109