委员会没有这样做，结果就毁掉了作出决定的逻辑基础。
to do so sawed off the very branch on which it intended to sit.
此外，它本来还应该确定第十四条所规定的保障是否得到尊重。
Neither did it consider it necessary to determine whether the guarantees enshrined in article 14 had or had not been respected, which it should have done.
总而言之，虽然我完全同意许多委员对于军事法庭和特别法庭的保留意见，但是我仍然认为，委员会无权损害作为其信誉基础并用以加强其可信度的法律严密性。
All in all, reservations about military courts and special courts, which I fully share with many Committee members, do not entitle the Committee to derogate from the legal rigour on which its reputation is built and which consolidates its credibility.
委员会也未获得授权可以超出其权限，或者将审案法庭的性质作为借口而不去确认《公约》第十四条所规定的所有保障和程序是否已经得到尊重。
Neither do they authorize it to exceed its remit or use the nature of the court hearing the case as an excuse not to ascertain whether all the guarantees and procedures spelled out in article 14 of the Covenant were respected or not.
法律灵活性只能用于丰富和改进法律，否则法律就会沦为超然法。
Legal flexibility can only be a source of enrichment and progress if law is not reduced to meta-law.
阿卜杜勒法塔赫·奥马尔 (签 名)
(Signed): Abdelfattah Amor
[提出时有英文、法文和西班牙文本，其中法文本是原文。
[Done in English, French and Spanish, the French text being the original version.
委员会成员艾哈迈德·陶菲克·哈利勒先生的个人意见
Individual opinion of Committee member Ahmed T.
Khalil (dissenting)
我希望记录在案：我不能接受第1173/2003号来文(Benhadj诉阿尔及利亚)第8.8段的意见。
I wish to put on record that I cannot accept the views expressed in paragraph 8.8 on communication No.
该意见认为缔约国违反了《公约》第十四条。
1173/2003, Benhadj v.
Algeria in which the Committee finds a violation by the State party of article 14 of the Covenant.
我采取这一立场的理由是基于我在关于第1172/2003号来文(Abbassi Madani诉阿尔及利亚)的不同意见中详细陈述的同样考虑。
The reasons for taking this position on my part are based on the same considerations spelled out in detail in my dissenting opinion on communication No. 1172/2003, Abbassi Madani v.
Algeria.
艾哈迈德·陶·哈利勒 (签 名)
(Signed): Ahmed T.
Khalil
[提出时有英文、法文和西班牙文本，其中英文本为原文。
[Done in English, French and Spanish, the English text being the original version.
O. 第1181/2003号来文，Amador诉西班牙 * (第八十八届会议，2006年10月31日通过的意见)
1181/2003, Amador v.
Spain* (Views adopted on 31 October 2006, Eighty-eighth session)
提交人： Francisco Amador Amador和Ramón Amador Amador (由律师Emilio Ginés Santidrián代理)
Submitted by: Francisco Amador Amador and Ramón Amador Amador (represented by counsel, Emilio Ginés Santidrián)
参考文件： 2002年9月20日(首次提交)
Date of communication: 20 September 2002 (initial submission)
事由：撤消刑事判决中的审查范围
Subject matter: Scope of review in cassation of criminal sentences
程序性问题：－
Procedural issues: -
实质性问题：判决和判罪得到上一级法院审查的权利
Substantive issues: Right to have a sentence and conviction reviewed by a higher court
《任择议定书》条款：－
Article of the Optional Protocol: -
于2006年10月31日举行会议，
Meeting on 31 October 2006,
结束了根据《公民权利和政治权利国际公约任择议定书》对代表Francisco Amador Amador先生和Ramón Amador Amador先生提交人权事务委员会的第1181/2003号来文的审议工作，
Having concluded its consideration of communication No. 1181/2003, submitted to the Human Rights Committee on behalf of Mr. Francisco Amador Amador and Mr. Ramón Amador Amador under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
1. 2002年9月20日来文的提交人是Francisco Amador Amador和Ramón Amador Amador, 西班牙国民，声称自己是西班牙违反《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第十四条第五款行为的受害者。
The authors of the communication, which is dated 20 September 2002, are Francisco Amador Amador and Ramón Amador Amador, Spanish nationals who claim to be the victims of a violation by Spain of article 14, paragraph 5, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
提交人由律师Emilio Ginés Santidrián先生代理。
The authors are represented by Mr. Emilio Ginés Santidrián.