CAT/C/57/D/628/2014 State party’s observations on the merits 4.1 On 17 March 2015, the State party submitted, firstly, that the communication was inadmissible and without merit. Secondly, it described the structure and composition of the Refugee Appeals Board. The activities of the Board are based on section 53a of the Aliens Act. Decisions of the Danish Immigration Service refusing asylum are automatically appealed to the Board unless the Service has considered the application to be manifestly unfounded. Appeal to the Board stays the execution of a deportation order. The Board is an independent, quasi-judicial body and is considered a court within the meaning of article 39 of Council of the European Union Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005 on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status. Under the Danish Aliens Act, Board members are independent and cannot seek direction from the appointing or nominating authority. Board decisions are final. Aliens may, however, bring an appeal before the ordinary courts, which have the authority to adjudicate any matter concerning limits to the competence of a public authority. As established by the Supreme Court, the ordinary courts’ review of decisions made by the Refugee Appeals Board is limited to a review on points of law, including any inadequacy in the basis for the relevant decision and the unlawful exercise of discretion, whereas the Board’s assessment of evidence is not subject to review. 4.2 The State party indicates that a residence permit can be granted to an alien if his or her circumstances fall within the provisions of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. Article 1 (A) of the 1951 Convention is incorporated into Danish law. A residence permit will further be issued to an alien upon application if he or she is at risk of facing the death penalty or being subjected to torture or other serious ill-treatment or punishment in the event of return to his or her country of origin (protection status). Section 7 (2) of the Aliens Act is very similar to article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights and, according to the explanatory notes on that section, the immigration authorities must comply with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the State party’s international obligations when applying this provision. In practice, the Refugee Appeals Board will generally consider the conditions for issuing a residence permit to be met when there are specific and individual factors substantiating that the asylum seeker will be exposed to a real risk of the death penalty or ill-treatment upon return. Furthermore, pursuant to section 31 (1) of the Aliens Act, an alien may not be returned to a country where he will be at risk of facing the death penalty or of being subjected to serious ill-treatment, or where the alien will not be protected against being sent on to such a country (the principle of non-refoulement). This obligation is absolute and protects all aliens. In this connection, the State party notes that the Refugee Appeals Board and the Danish Immigration Service have jointly drafted a number of memorandums describing in detail the legal protection of asylum seekers afforded by international law, in particular the 1951 Convention, the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 4.3 The Refugee Appeals Board assigns counsel free of charge in all cases, and all the case materials and documents are sent to counsel well in advance of the hearing. Proceedings before the Board are oral and, inter alia, an asylum seeker, his or her counsel and an interpreter are present. At the hearing, an asylum seeker is allowed to make a statement and answer questions. After the closing statements of the counsel and the representative of the Danish Immigration Service, an asylum seeker can make a final statement. The Board’s decision will normally be served on an asylum seeker immediately after the hearing and, at the same time, the person chairing the hearing will briefly explain the reasoning behind the decision. The State party notes that decisions are based on an individual and specific assessment of the relevant case and that an asylum seeker’s statements regarding his or her grounds for asylum are assessed in the light of all relevant 3