67. 工作组强调，尽管政府辩称，案件管理和拘留审查委员会对 Jaffarie 先生的拘留进行了约 69 次审查，但该委员会不是《公约》第九条第 4 款所要求的司法机构。9 工作组注意到，政府方面一再未能解释委员会进行的审查如何满足《公约》第九条所载质疑拘留合法性的权利所包含的保障。10 因此，工作组认为，5 A/HRC/30/37, 第 2–3 段。6 同上，第 11 段。7 同上，附件，第 47 (a)段。8 同上，附件，第 47 (b)段。9 见第 20/2018 号意见，第 61 段、第 50/2018 号意见，第 77 段、第 74/2018 号意见，第 112段、第 1/2019 号意见，第 80 段、第 2/2019 号意见，第 95 段。10 同上。Jaffarie 先生向司法机构质疑其拘留合法性的权利，即《公约》第九条第 4 款所载的权利受到了侵犯。在得出这一结论时，工作组还回顾了人权事务委员会的许多结论，其中认定，在澳大利亚适用强制性移民拘留以及不可能对这种拘留提出质疑违反了《公约》第九条。11
67. The Working Group underscores that, although the Government argues that the detention of Mr. Jaffarie has been reviewed some 69 times by the Case Management and Detention Review Committee, the Committee is not a judicial body as required by article 9 (4) of the Covenant.9 The Working Group observes the repeated failure on behalf of the Government to explain how the reviews carried out by the Committee satisfy the guarantees encapsulated in the right to challenge the legality of detention enshrined in article 9 of the Covenant.10 The Working Group therefore finds that Mr. Jaffarie’s right to challenge the legality of his detention before a judicial body, the right enshrined in article 9 (4) of the Covenant, has been violated. In making this finding, the Working Group also recalls the numerous findings by the Human Rights Committee where the application of mandatory immigration detention in Australia and the impossibility of challenging such detention has been found to be in breach of article 9 of the Covenant.11