Home›Sources›Yaker v. France, Communication No. 2747/2016, CCPR/C/123/D/2747/2016SourcesYaker v. France, Communication No. 2747/2016, CCPR/C/123/D/2747/2016Citation FormatsGeneral ReferenceGeneral Reference Citation TextDivinity Atlas. "Yaker v. France, Communication No. 2747/2016, CCPR/C/123/D/2747/2016." Accessed August 30, 2026. https://dev-divinity.interactiveatlas.org/sources/yaker-v-france-communication-no-2747-2016-ccpr-c-123-d-2747-2016.Copy General ReferenceAPA StyleAPA Style Citation TextDivinity Atlas. (n.d.). Yaker v. France, Communication No. 2747/2016, CCPR/C/123/D/2747/2016. Retrieved August 30, 2026, from https://dev-divinity.interactiveatlas.org/sources/yaker-v-france-communication-no-2747-2016-ccpr-c-123-d-2747-2016Copy APA StyleBibTeXBibTeX Citation Text@misc{divinityatlas-yaker-v-france-communication-no-2747-201, author = {Divinity Atlas}, title = {Yaker v. France, Communication No. 2747/2016, CCPR/C/123/D/2747/2016}, year = {2026}, url = {https://dev-divinity.interactiveatlas.org/sources/yaker-v-france-communication-no-2747-2016-ccpr-c-123-d-2747-2016}, note = {Accessed August 30, 2026} }Copy BibTeXYaker v. France, the United Nations Human Rights Committee's own 2018 communication decision, found that France's face covering ban violated Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, reaching the opposite conclusion to the European Court of Human Rights on comparable facts. Its strength is that it is the Committee's own decision, an authoritative international human rights body's reasoned ruling. Its limit is that international human rights committee views are not binding court judgments in the way a domestic or regional court's ruling is, and the European Court's contrary judgment should also be checked.FactsCross-Tradition ConnectionsClaims Backed By This Source (10 claims)Comments (0)Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)FactsAssessmentReliability TierWell-attested1Reliability tier 1: an international human rights body's own reasoned decision, authoritative for its own conclusion though not a binding court judgment in the way a domestic or regional court's ruling is.NotesWell-attestedFound the French face-covering ban to violate Article 18 of the ICCPR, reaching the opposite conclusion to the European Court of Human Rights on comparable facts.CitationAuthorWell-attestedUnited Nations Human Rights CommitteePublisherWell-attestedUnited NationsPublication YearWell-attested2018Source TypeWell-attestedInternational bodyCross-Tradition ConnectionsAssociated WithFrance, Countries Well-attested This source names France directly: "Yaker v. France, the United Nations Human Rights Committee's own 2018 communication decision, found that France's face covering ban violated Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and..."Source Yaker v. France, Communication No. 2747/2016, CCPR/C/123/D/2747/2016United Nations Human Rights Committeetier 1Claims Backed By This Source (10 claims)This source backs 10 claims across the atlas. As facts: 7 well-attested. As cited relationships: 1 holds. Plus 2 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.Disposition By TopicSources, 8 claims: 7 well-attested, 1 holds.Religious Dress & Vestments, 2 claims: 2 general references.Well-attested7SourcesYaker v. France, Communication No. 2747/2016, CCPR/C/123/D/2747/2016Holds1SourcesYaker v. France, Communication No. 2747/2016, CCPR/C/123/D/2747/2016General References2Religious Dress & VestmentsHijabNiqabComments (0)No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.Sign in to join the discussion.Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.View At A Past YearThe atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.Show This Year