CCPR/C/112/D/2026/2011 4.2 The State party further points out that the Rachid Sassene case is still pending, being under consideration by the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances of the Human Rights Council. It recalls that it is one of 2,704 cases of alleged disappearance in Algeria that are being examined by the Working Group. The Working Group has compared this list and the list officially drawn up by the State party of cases of victims of the national tragedy that have been settled under the provisions of the Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation. In the lists prepared by the Government of the State party, Rachid Sassene appears as: “deceased: armed member of a terrorist group eliminated during a counter-terrorist operation”. The State party points out, however, that “in the absence of any formal application for compensation from the beneficiaries”, it had not been possible to process the present case under the Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation. The State party notes that contacts, exchanges of correspondence and formal meetings between the Government and the Working Group are still in progress. 4.3 The State party also recalls that the alleged enforced disappearance of Rachid Sassene falls into the category of allegations of violations committed in the context of the antiterrorism struggle during the period of the national tragedy, which have already been addressed by the domestic settlement mechanism provided for in the Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation. 4.4 The State party concludes that the communication is inadmissible. The author’s comments on the State party’s submission 5.1 On 12 March 2012, the author submitted comments on the State party’s observations on the admissibility of the communication. 5.2 The author points out that, since the State party has not contested the allegations set forth in the communication, the Committee must afford due weight to the conclusions reached by the author in her communication and consider that all the allegations have been sufficiently substantiated. Issues and proceedings before the Committee Consideration of admissibility 6.1 The Committee points out that the Special Rapporteur’s decision not to separate the decisions on admissibility and the merits (see para. 1.2 above) does not mean that the Committee cannot consider the two matters separately. Before considering any claim contained in a communication, the Committee must decide, in accordance with rule 93 of its rules of procedure, whether the communication is admissible under the Optional Protocol to the Covenant. 6.2 As required under article 5, paragraph 2 (a), of the Optional Protocol, the Committee has ascertained that the same matter is not being examined under any other procedure of international investigation or settlement. The Committee notes in this regard that the State party is of the view that the case of Rachid Sassene is currently being considered by the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances and that this communication is not admissible. However, it recalls that extra-conventional procedures or mechanisms established by the Human Rights Council to examine and report publicly on human rights situations in specific countries or territories, or on cases of widespread human rights violations worldwide, do not generally constitute an international procedure of investigation or settlement within the meaning of article 5, paragraph 2 (a), of the Optional Protocol. 10 10 GE.14-24387 See, inter alia, communications No. 1791/2008, Boudjemai v. Algeria, Views adopted on 22 March 2013, para. 7.2; No. 1779/2008, Mezine v. Algeria, Views adopted on 25 October 2012, para. 7.2; No. 7