CCPR/C/118/D/2242/2013 their failure to do so.53 Furthermore, they advise that on 21 May 2015 they filed a second application for “benefit of penury” before the Council of State in order to appeal the Athens Administrative Court of Appeal decisions denying them such benefit; however, despite the fact that the deadline for submitting the appeal mentioned is 60 days, the Council of State had not issued a decision on the matter two and a half months after their application. Further submission by the State party 10.1 On 4 March 2016, the State party submitted that the authorization given by the authors to the Secretary-General of I Elpida on 10 August 2015 is a late submission that should not be accepted by the Committee. It therefore reiterates that the communication was presented only on behalf of the 20 residents of the settlement who signed the authorizations. As regards legal aid, the State party reiterates that the authors’ claim should be held inadmissible for lack of substantiation. 10.2 The State party informs the Committee that in February 2016, the Council of State issued its judgment on the motions of annulment against the second relocation decision. The Council of State quashed the contested decision, on the grounds that the joint ministerial decision upon which it was based54 was not applicable to a population group established in a specific area, such as the Halandri settlement. The Secretary-General of the Decentralized Administration of Attica therefore does not have the competence to take any decisions concerning the relocation of the Roma. However, he holds competence for the execution of the demolition of the illegal structures, which would only take place if the rights enshrined in the Covenant were ensured. 10.3 The State party also notes that the authorities have taken measures to improve the situation in the settlement, which includes the working group created in 2014. Further cleaning was carried out in August 2015, and inhabitants had access to a communal tap, public transportation, a social clinic, a store and a regular refuse collection. Furthermore, in February 2016, the Halandri settlement was selected for the implementation of a pilot programme on Roma communities,55 and many children have enrolled at school thanks to a joint effort by teachers and local authorities. Issues and proceedings before the Committee Consideration of admissibility 11.1 Before considering any claims contained in a communication, the Committee must decide, in accordance with rule 93 of its rules of procedure, whether it is admissible under the Optional Protocol. 11.2 The Committee has ascertained, as required under article 5 (2) (a) of the Optional Protocol, that the same matter is not being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement. 11.3 The Committee notes the State party’s argument that by virtue of article 2 of the Optional Protocol the first author of the communication, being an association, cannot submit communications to the Committee. It also notes the State party’s submission that the communication only concerns the 20 persons who signed an authorization for action to be 53 54 55 14 The authors provide a copy in Greek of a decision of the Athens Administrative Court of Appeal — 25/22-4-2015 — denying them the “benefit of penury” to litigate the motion of annulment before the Council of State. Joint ministerial decision 23641/2003, which amended the 1983 sanitary provision on settlements of itinerant persons. No further details have been provided.