prison and in the hospital, acted negligently in that they were, or seemed to be, incapable of giving I. M. the appropriate treatment. 7.1 Before considering any claims presented in a communication, the Human Rights Committee must, in accordance with rule 87 of its provisional rules of procedure, decide whether or not it is admissible under the Optional Protocol to the Covenant. 7.2 The Committee has ascertained, as it is required to do under article 5, paragraph 2 (a), of the Optional Protocol, that the same matter is not being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement. 7.3 Inasmuch as the exhaustion of domestic remedies is concerned, the Committee observes that it would be open to the author, pursuant to article 91 of the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure, to introduce a civil action against those alleged to be responsible for his brother's death. The Committee has further noted the State party's uncontested claim that it did institute criminal proceedings against the individuals held to be responsible for the death of I. M., on 26 August 1987, and that the investigations are proceeding normally. The Committee concludes that available domestic remedies have not been exhausted and that the requirements of article 5, paragraph 2 (b), of the Optional Protocol have not been met. 7.4 With respect to the author's complaint that the alleged victim was denied the opportunity of a further interview with the examining magistrate, the Committee finds that this raises no issue under the Covenant. 8. The Human Rights Committee therefore decides: (a) The communication is inadmissible; (b) This decision shall be communicated to the author and to the State party. _______________ Communication No. 268/1987 Submitted by: M. G. B. and S. P. (names deleted) on 4 December 1987 Alleged victim: The authors 60