CCPR/C/114/D/2426/2014 seekers be granted the right to appeal against decisions of the Refugee Appeals Board (see CERD/C/DEN/CO/17, para. 13). 2.5 The author contends that it has been a longstanding practice for Iranian refugees from Al-Tash camp who have been recognized by UNHCR as refugees to be granted residence permits in accordance with section 7 (1) of the Danish Aliens Act. However, this practice changed in 2011, as it was decided that Iraq could serve as the first country of asylum, in the light of the length of their residence in that country. Yet, Iraq would not accept Iranian refugees since they were not Iraqi citizens. Therefore, these cases were reopened and refugees were granted residence permits in Denmark. In 2013, the Danish Immigration Service started denying asylum to some refugees from Al-Tash camp; each case is assessed on an individual basis. The complaint 3.1 The author claims that his deportation to the Islamic Republic of Iran would put him at risk of being subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, given that he has always lived in refugee camps in Iraq, such as Al-Tash and Barika camps, which carry a great affiliation to PDKI. He argues that he would automatically be perceived as an active member of PDKI, especially since he has sympathized with the party since 2009 and has participated in meetings and a folk dancing group, and because he sought PDKI membership seven months prior to his departure, as well as because of his father’s political engagement with PDKI in the Islamic Republic of Iran and his family’s involvement with the party in Iraq by attending meetings and festivities. The family’s connection to PDKI could put him at risk of being detained and imprisoned and subjected to torture. He adds that Iranian authorities would know that he had spent his entire life in Kurdish refugee camps and would be interested in his knowledge about PDKI. He notes that Iranian intelligence services routinely ask people to provide them with information about PDKI and, if they refuse to do so, they are accused of being spies and at risk of persecution. 3.2 The author adds that the fact that he is not registered in the Islamic Republic of Iran, has no identification documents and does not speak Farsi increases the risk of persecution. State party’s observations on admissibility and merits 4.1 On 16 December 2014, the State party submitted its observations on the admissibility and merits of the communication. The State party claims that the communication should be considered inadmissible for lack of sufficient substantiation of the author’s risk of being subjected to torture or other form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment if returned to the Islamic Republic of Iran. 4.2 The State party alleges that, should the communication be considered admissible, the facts as presented by the author do not reveal a violation of article 7 of the Covenant. The State party cites the Committee jurisprudence according to which the risk of being subjected to torture or ill-treatment must be personal and the author must provide substantial grounds to establish that a real risk of irreparable harm exists. 2 4.3 The State party informs the Committee that, pursuant to section 7 (1) of the Danish Aliens Act, a residence permit will be issued to an alien upon application if he or she falls under the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. Pursuant to section 7 (2) of the Aliens Act, a residence permit will also be issued to an alien if he or she is at risk of being 2 4 The State party cites the Committee’s views in the case X v. Denmark (communication No. 2007/2010, Views adopted on 26 March 2014), para. 9.2.