CCPR/C/79/D/910/2000 Page 12 effective remedies, as claimed by the author, the Committee has made a decision which, legally speaking, is questionable and could even be contested. 6. It is to be feared that this decision will constitute a vexatious precedent, in the sense that it could be taken to condone a practice that lies outside the scope of article 5, paragraph 2 (b), of the Optional Protocol. To sum up, I am of the view that, considering the circumstances described in the communication, the author’s doubts about the effectiveness of the domestic remedies do not absolve him from exhausting them. The Committee should have concluded that the provision contained in article 5, paragraph 2 (a), of the Optional Protocol had not been satisfied and that the communication was inadmissible. (Signed): Abdelfattah Amor [Done in English, French and Spanish, the French text being the original version.]