10.2 The Committee further is of the view that there has not been any violation of the Covenant in respect of the other provisions invoked. 10.3 For the reasons given above, in paragraph 9 (a), the Committee finds that the 17 unmarried coauthors cannot presently claim to be victims of any breach of their rights under the Covenant. 11. The Committee, accordingly, is of the view that the State party should adjust the provisions of the Immigration (Amendment) Act, 1977 and of the Deportation (Amendment) Act, 1977 in order to implement its obligations under the Covenant, and should provide immediate remedies for the victims of the violations found above. ' Pursuant to rule 85 of the provisional rules of procedure, Mr. Rajsoomer Lallah did not participate in the consideration of this communication or in the adoption of the views of the Committee under article 5 (4) of the Optional Protocol in this matter. 'Subsequently one of the authors agreed to the disclosure of her name.