Alleged victim: The author and her disappeared children State party: Argentina Declared inadmissible: 26 March 1990 (thirty-eighth session)* Subject matter: Abduction of author's children by State party security forces Procedural issues: Inadmissibility ratione temporis Individual opinion Substantive issues: Effective judicial remedy Articles of the Covenant: 2 (3), (a) and (b) Articles of the Optional Protocol: 2 and 3 __________ * The text of an individual opinion submitted by Mr. Bertil Wennergren pursuant to rule 92, paragraph 3, of the Committee's rules of procedure is appended. 1. The author of the communication is an Argentinian citizen residing in Argentina. She writes on her own behalf and on behalf of her three disappeared children, born in 1951, 1953 and 1956, respectively, alleging violations of the Covenant by the Government of Argentina. She is represented by counsel. The background 2.1 The author states that her eldest son, L. M. E., was abducted in Argentina on 10 August 1976 by persons belonging to or associated with the police, security forces or armed forces, apparently on account of his political opinions. Another son, C. E., and her daughter, L. E., were detained on 4 November 1976 in Uruguay and were allegedly seen in November/Decem-ber 1976 at a detention camp in Argentina known as "The Bank" and at a police station, Brigada Guenes, in Buenos Aires. Their whereabouts have been unknown ever since, in spite of all the steps undertaken by the author to discover what happened to them. 2.2 On 24 December 1986, the Argentine legislature proclaimed Law No. 23,492, the so-called "Finality Act" (Ley de Punto Final), which established a deadline of 60 days for commencing new criminal investigations with regard to the events of the so-called "dirty war" (guerra sucia). This deadline expired on 22 February 1987. On 8 June 1987, Law No. 23,521, the Due Obedience Act (Ley de Obediencia Debida) was promulgated, introducing an irrebuttable presumption that members of the security, police and prison services cannot be punished for such crimes if committed in due obedience to orders. The Act further extends protection to senior officers who did not have a decision-making role with regard to the violations. The Argentine Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of 69