... (b) That this decision may be reviewed under rule 109 of the Committee's rules of procedure upon receipt of a written request by or on behalf of the alleged victim containing information to the effect that the reasons for inadmissibility no longer apply; (c) That this decision shall be communicated to the author and, for information, to the State party. [Done in English, French, Russian and Spanish, the English text being the original version.] B. Communication No. 9/1991, L.B. y. Spain (Decision of 18 November 1991, adopted at the seventh session) Submitted b~: L.B. (name deleted) Alleged victim: The author State party concerned: Spain Date of commynication: 16 September 1991 The Committee against Torture, established under article 17 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Meeting on 18 November 1991, Adopts the following: Decision on admissibility 1. The author of the communication (dated 16 September 1991) is L.B., a lawyer residing in Spain. He claims to be a victim of artiCle 1 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment because of the degrading and humiliating treatment he allegedly receives from Spanish judges and magistrates in retaliation for having brought charges against them. 2. Before considering any claims contained in a communic·ation, the Committee against Torture must decide whether or not it is admissible under article 22 of the Convention. 3. Article 22, paragraph 2, of the Convention provides that the Committee shall declare inadmissible any communication which it considers to be an abuse of the right of submission, or to be incompatible with the provisions of the Convention. The Committee observes that the treatment the author complains of manifestly does not fall within the scope of article 1 of the Convention, which defines the term "torture", nor within the scope of article 16, which -82- Digitized by Dag Hammarskjöld Library refe is i 4. para~ infol [DonE origi