CCPR/C/117/D/2469/2014 that it would constitute a violation of article 7 of the Covenant to return the author to Afghanistan. Author’s additional comments 7.1 On 28 April 2016, the author submitted that the State party relied solely on a correspondence dated 12 June 2012, received by the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs from Mission Essential Personnel, which stated that the author had worked from April 2010 to 1 May 2011, and that he had resigned from his position for family reasons. 7.2 In August 2015, the author’s counsel contacted Mission Essential Personnel, which confirmed that the author had never formally given the company his formal resignation, but had only orally given the “point of contact” of his resignation, which was then notified to Mission Essential Personnel.11 7.3 The author adds that he had left his job and Afghanistan without informing anyone. During his interview with the Danish immigration service on 11 July 2012, he stated that an Afghan colleague of his, the head of interpreting, might have stated that the author had resigned for family reasons, so as not to jeopardize his possible resumption of duties, and that this reason had later been retained as the official reason for his resignation. The fact that the author resigned and left the country without telling anyone is further confirmed in an e-mail sent to the author by M.W., dated 15 January 2013, which states: “since you had your vacation in June, you disappeared”.12 7.4 The author agrees that there are discrepancies in dates: in the letter from J.S., it is stated that the author acted as an interpreter for international security forces at Qalat police headquarters in Zabul from 1 July 2010 to 31 May 2011; in the consultation response of 12 June from Mission Essential Personnel, received by the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the author is reported to have worked from April 2010 to 1 May 2011; finally, in the letter produced by S.B. — the author’s legal counsel in the United States — received from J.A., it appears that J.A was the author’s supervisor from 15 July 2010 to 20 May 2011. Consequently, according to the author, such discrepancies support the fact that there is no precise date for his resignation, as there was no official resignation. 7.5 However, the author notes that the main reason for the rejection of his claims is precisely the discrepancies in the dates for his resignation, although the refugee appeals board accepted for a fact that the author acted as interpreter for the United States forces in Afghanistan. The author reiterates that, by upholding the denial of his asylum claim, the State party has put at great risk his right to life and his right not to be exposed to acts of torture or other degrading treatment if he were returned to Afghanistan. Issues and proceedings before the Committee Consideration of admissibility 8.1 Before considering any claims contained in a communication, the Human Rights Committee must, in accordance with rule 93 of its rules of procedure, decide whether or not it is admissible under the Optional Protocol to the Covenant. 8.2 The Committee has ascertained, as required under article 5 (2) (a) of the Optional Protocol, that the same matter is not being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement. The Committee notes that it is undisputed that the 11 12 10 The author annexes the relevant e-mail exchange his counsel had with Mission Essential Personnel in this respect between 13 and 19 August 2015. The author annexes this exchange.