CAT/C/63/D/750/2016 Migration Court therefore concluded that the complainant’s reasons for asylum had escalated during the process, that his statements had been contradictory and partly vague and lacking in detail, and thus were not reliable and could not constitute grounds to grant him and his daughter residence permits. 4.8 The State party further refutes the complainant’s claim that he qualifies as a refugee sur place. According to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, in paragraph 96 of its Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status under the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees:12 A person may become a refugee sur place as a result of his own actions, such as associating with refugees already recognized, or expressing his political views in his country of residence. Whether such actions are sufficient to justify a well-founded fear of persecution must be determined by a careful examination of the circumstances. Regard should be had in particular to whether such actions may have come to the notice of the authorities of the person’s country of origin and how they are likely to be viewed by those authorities. By the complainant’s own estimation, as testified during the proceedings in the Migration Court, 300 copies of his book on crime and punishment in the Islamic Republic of Iran had been published in Sweden, and it was available for purchase in a bookshop in Stockholm. Based on the complainant’s submission, the Migration Court concluded that it was unlikely that the material in the book had reached a large number of people and that the complainant had not plausibly demonstrated that the book had come to the attention of the Iranian authorities. The Migration Court further concluded that, even if the book and the online articles had come to the attention of the Iranian authorities, the scale of the sur place activities had been relatively limited and there was no reason to assume that the Iranian authorities would show any particular interest in them, particularly as nothing had emerged to suggest that the complainant was a well-known political figure in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The State party emphasizes that, in cases like this, it is of utmost importance to first consider the scale of the asylum seeker’s political engagement before assessing the plausibility or risk that his or her actions sur place would attract the attention of the national authorities upon the asylum seeker’s return. Only after these initial factors have been assessed can the question of whether there is a real risk of persecution upon return to the country of origin be determined. 4.9 The State party refers to the report from the Home Office of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, which states that decision makers must be satisfied that persons claiming to be journalists or bloggers are able to demonstrate that their activities have brought or will bring them to the adverse attention of the Iranian authorities. Decision makers should give consideration to all relevant factors, including in particular the subject matter of the material in question, the language and tone used, the method of communication, the reach of the publication — i.e. how many people are they communicating with — the publicity attracted, the frequency of such publications and any past adverse interest by the authorities. Due to the vast number of Iranians in exile who take part in protests and online activities, Iranian authorities cannot monitor all of their online activities. They are therefore compelled to focus on those whose activities are extensive and go beyond expressing regular criticism, and those who are in organized opposition to the regime and present a real and serious threat to the regime. 13 4.10 As regards the letter from the organization Iranian PEN Centre in Exile, which was submitted to the Migration Agency, the State party submits that it contained only general information and seemed to be based on information provided by the complainant himself. It alone cannot establish the extent to which the complainant has expressed himself critically against the Iranian regime on the Internet or the extent to which his book has been spread. 12 13 Available at www.unhcr.org/4d93528a9.pdf. See “Country Information and Guidance – Iran: Journalists and Bloggers” (9 October 2014), para. 16, available at www.refworld.org/docid/54365e5e4.html. 5