CCPR/C/122/D/2642/2015 carried out its verification activities, and insisted that a criminal case against him existed in the court of Dhaka. 2.11 The Board concluded that the author had not been able to substantiate the grounds for asylum. It also stated that the author had presented insufficient evidence to establish that he was more than a sympathizer of the Jamaat-e-Islami and that, accordingly, he was not a high-profile individual in the eyes of the authorities or any political party. Therefore, the alleged isolated assault that had taken place in October 2007 — the attack by the party’s leaders — could not justify the asylum claim. 2.12 On 10 December 2015, the author submitted to the Board a certificate from the Bureau of Human Rights Bangladesh indicating that he had been subjected to torture in Bangladesh, that his life was threatened there and that false accusations had been made against him, involving him in a murder. He also submitted two undated articles in Bengali indicating that the Jamaat-e-Islami would soon be declared illegal in Bangladesh because of the party’s criminal offences against people perpetrated in the context of the liberation movement in 1971, and that an individual with the same name as the author had been provisionally charged as a traitor and was on the run. According to the second article, that person was a well-known student leader of the Jamaat-e-Islami students’ organization and had been charged with treachery. The article also stated that there were more pending cases against him and that, therefore, he was a person of interest to the authorities. The Board considered the submission of these documents as a request to reopen the asylum proceedings. On 12 February 2016, the Board refused to reopen the asylum proceedings. It noted that, based on their appearance, content and late submission, the documents appeared to be fabricated for the occasion. It also stated that the author had failed to explain why the documents had not been provided at an earlier stage of the asylum proceedings. The Board referred to a memorandum published by the Norwegian Country of Origin Information Centre (Landinfo) that stated that it was easy to obtain false documents in Bangladesh. Therefore, the Board relied on the reasoning of its decision of 7 January 2014 and rejected the author’s request to reopen proceedings. The complaint 3.1 The author claims that if he were deported to Bangladesh, he would risk being imprisoned and tortured because of the false charges against him for crimes committed by the Jamaat-e-Islami and because he would be considered as a member of that organization, and that the authorities are very harsh with its members. 10 He submits that he would be arrested and tortured and could even be sentenced to death, in violation of his rights under article 9 (1) of the Covenant. 3.2 The author also claims that he is considered to be a traitor by the Jamaat-e-Islami and could be killed for refusing to cooperate with them, because members are supposed to cooperate for life. He indicates that he has learned from low-level members of the Jamaate-Islami that the party is aware that he did not die as a result of the attack by the party’s leaders in October 2007 and that they would try to kill him again. He further alleges that the Bangladeshi authorities will not protect him because the Jamaat-e-Islami is an antigovernment group. He therefore considers that deporting him to Bangladesh would amount to a violation of article 1 of the Covenant. State party’s observations 4.1 On 17 February 2016, the State party submitted its observations on the admissibility and the merits of the communication. It provides a description of relevant domestic legislation and submits that the complainant’s asylum request was considered in accordance with that legislation, in particular the Aliens Act, which reflects the same principles as those established in article 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights), in compliance with its 10 The author refers to a press release by Amnesty International, “Bangladesh: disturbing increase in disappearances, clampdown on press freedom”, 2 September 2014. He also refers to Human Rights Watch, World Report 2014:Bangladesh, available at www.hrw.org/world-report/2014/countrychapters/bangladesh. 5