removal from Ecuadorian jurisdiction suffered from irregularities. Issues and proceedings before the Committee 5.1 On 18 October 1990, the Committee declared the communication admissible inasmuch as it appeared to raise issues under articles 7, 9 and 13, in conjunction with article 2, of the Covenant. With respect to the requirement of exhaustion of domestic remedies, the Committee found that, on the basis of the information before it, there were no domestic remedies that the author could have pursued. The Committee further observed. that several of the author’s allegations appeared to be directed against the authorities of the United States, and deemed the relevant parts of the communication inadmissible, since the United States had not ratified, or acceded to, the Covenant or the Optional Protocol. Inasmuch as the author’s claim under article 17 of the Covenant was concerned, the Committee found that Mr. Canón Garcia had failed to sufficiently substantiate, for purposes of admissibility, his allegation. 6.1 The Human Rights Committee, acting under article 5, paragraph 4, of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, finds that the facts before it reveal violations of articles 7, 9 and 13 of the Covenant. 6.2 In accordance with the provisions of article 2 of the Covenant, the State party is under an obligation to take measures to remedy the violations suffered by Mr. Canón García. In this connection, the Committee has taken note of the State party’s assurance that it is investigating the author’s claims and the circumstances leading to his expulsion from Ecuador, with a view to prosecuting those held responsible for the violations of his rights. 7. The Committee would appreciate receiving from the State party, within ninety days of the transmittal to it of this decision, all pertinent information on the results of all its investigations, as well as on measures taken to remedy the situation, and in order to prevent the repetition of such events in the future. 5.2 As to the merits, the Human Rights Committee notes that the State party does not seek to refute the author’s allegations, in so far as they relate to articles 7, 9 and 13 of the Covenant, and that it concedes that the author’s _______________ Communication No. 327/1988 Submitted by: Hervé Barzhig Date of communication: 9 September 1988 Alleged victim: The author State party: France Date of adoption of Views: 11 April 1991 (forty-first session) Subject matter: Use of Breton language in court proceedings Procedural remedies* Substantive issues: Effective remedy—Equality before the courts and tribunals—Right to free assistance of an interpreter—Right to freedom of expression—Discrimination on the ground of language—Right to use one’s own language 1. The author of the communication (initial submission of 9 September 1988 and subsequent correspondence) is Hervé Barzhig, a French citizen born in 1961 and a resident of Rennes, Bretagne, France. He claims to be the victim of a violation by France of articles 2, 14, 19, 26 and 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Articles of the Covenant: 2(1), 14(1) and (3)(f), 19(2), 26 and 27 issue: Exhaustion of domestic Article of the Optional Protocol: 5(2)(b) * See in this connection also the Committee’s Views in communications Nos. 221/1987 and 323/1988 above. 92