A/HRC/25/60/Add.2 144. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of Sweden for its replies, dated 8 February 2013 and 12 April 2013, to this communication in reference to the alleged imminent deportation of Abdullah Barahouei to the Islamic Republic of Iran. Reportedly, Mr. Barahouei contributed to the Balochistan Sarafaz blog and feared for his life after the editor and several blog contributors were arrested and sentenced to 20 years in prison in Iran. Allegedly, there are reports of various cases of human rights defenders being subjected to arrest, torture, and sentenced to death for speaking out against the Islamic Republic of Iran. It was reported that the Swedish Migration Board would make a decision regarding Mr. Barahouei’s immigration status on 1 February 2013. In its first reply, the Government of Sweden explained that Mr. Barahouei’s application for asylum was denied, but is being appealed because of new circumstances that were not considered. In the second reply, the Government of Sweden informed the Special Rapporteur that asylum was granted to Mr. Barahouei, and that he would not be deported. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of Sweden for its commitment to article 3 of the CAT, which provides that no State party shall expel, return (“refouler”), or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that the person would be in danger of being subjected to torture. The Special Rapporteur encourages the Government to continue its engagement with the mandate. (b) JUA 02/05/2013 Case No. SWE 2/2013 State Reply: 14/06/2013 Alleged imminent deportation of an Afghan journalist. 145. The Special Rapporteur thanks the government of Sweden for its reply, dated 14 June 2013, to this communication in reference to the alleged imminent deportation of an Afghan journalist who received death threats from the Taliban. While based in Jalalabad in eastern Afghanistan, the journalist reported on the border area between Afghanistan and Pakistan for the Daily Wahdat and Khyber TV before fleeing the country with his family to Peshawar, in northern Pakistan in August 2008, allegedly due to death threats, including life-threatening calls and text messages by the Taliban in retaliation for his journalistic activities. In early 2011, he had been reportedly kidnapped by the Taliban and tortured and ill-treated while detained for 20 days in Miranshah, Pakistan near the Afghan border. Reportedly his family received protection and was relocated to the United States of America by the UNHCR in 2009. Also, his brother has been already granted asylum in Sweden. It was reported that the Migration Board would meet on 2 May 2013 to make a decision whether to deport him to Afghanistan or not. In the response dated 14 June 2013, the Government of Sweden stated that since this is a pending asylum case, the identity of the applicant should not be disclosed in the Special Rapporteur’s official report to the Human Rights Council. In summary, the Migration Board found that the Joint Urgent Appeal contained no new information or evidence in support of the applicant’s need for protection in Sweden. The Migration Court had previously found that the applicant was not in need of protection in Sweden and therefore decided not to grant him a residence permit in Sweden. However, the Government stated that it is incorrect to say that enforcement of an expulsion order is imminent. The reply adds that the applicant was awarded sufficient due process in his asylum hearings, including an interpreter, public counsel, several interviews and hearings by the Migration Court. The Special Rapporteur reminds the government of Sweden of article 3 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, acceded to by Sweden on 8 January 1986, which provides that no State party shall expel, return (“refouler”), or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that the person would be in danger of being subjected to torture. In this regard, paragraph 9 of General Comment No. 20 on the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment declares that State parties “must not expose individuals to the danger of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment upon return to another country by way of extradition, expulsion or refoulement”. Under similar provisions, paragraph 16 of 105