CCPR/C/125/D/2901/2016 author had previously entered Bulgaria, Bulgaria was responsible for the author’s asylum application. The Office thus ordered the author’s transfer to Bulgaria. The author had only one brief interview before this decision was issued. During that interview, he was not asked any questions about Bulgaria, and was not given an opportunity to comment on the potential applicability of the Dublin III Regulation. He challenged the removal decision, but did not have legal assistance during this process. 2.9 Thereafter, the author’s asylum counsel submitted an expert opinion, issued by a psychologist from the Cordelia Foundation for the Rehabilitation of Torture Victims, to the Office of Immigration and Nationality. The psychologist stated that the author was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder and was terrified by the prospect of returning to Bulgaria. The psychologist also indicated that the author had suffered inhuman and degrading treatment, and that separation from his cousin would further impair the author’s psychological well-being. The psychologist stated that the author’s mental state required that he be housed in an open reception facility. 2.10 On 7 October 2016, the Office of Immigration and Nationality ordered the author’s release from detention on the basis of the psychologist’s opinion. On 3 November 2016, the Administrative and Labour Court of Győr ruled that the decision of the Office of Immigration and Nationality of 15 July 2016 to transfer the author to Bulgaria was lawful, because it was in line with the Dublin III Regulation. The Court did not evaluate reception conditions in Bulgaria, or the author’s individual circumstances. The decision is final and may not be appealed. 2.11 On 4 November 2016, at the author’s request, the Office of Immigration and Nationality issued a decision placing the author with a Hungarian host family in Monor. The Office also ensured the author’s continued access to therapy sessions. Thus, while residing with his host family, the author received regular therapy. His condition was slowly improving, though he routinely had nightmares and dreaded returning to Bulgaria. According to his psychologist, he needed continuous therapy and stable support to “restore the integrity of his personality”. 2.12 After the present communication was registered, the author provided, in further correspondence dated 23 January 2017, a letter issued by the Immigration and Asylum Office on 13 January 2017. The letter stated that on 2 January 2017, the Office had withdrawn its decision to remove the author to Bulgaria, and that Hungary was the State responsible for conducting his asylum proceedings. The complaint 3.1 The author alleges that by removing him to Bulgaria under the Dublin III Regulation, the State party would violate his rights under article 7 of the Covenant, because there are substantial grounds for believing that he would face a real risk of irreparable harm amounting to inhuman or degrading treatment in Bulgaria. The conditions in Bulgaria amount to such treatment, due to systemic deficiencies in both reception conditions and asylum procedures. The author asserts that the asylum system in Bulgaria does not systematically allow identification of vulnerable asylum seekers, in particular children, and lacks a system designed to respond to children’s needs. Moreover, in Bulgarian reception centres, asylum seekers face poor hygiene conditions and nutrition, abusive and violent treatment by guards, overcrowding, substandard and insalubrious material conditions, and a lack of medical care, education for children, interpreters, and information on asylum procedures.1 Reports also indicate that the Government of Bulgaria has not taken action to remedy conditions in reception facilities, and that detainees in these facilities may receive insufficient food for survival, and may be subjected to deliberate deprivation of food and liquids and to ill-treatment and humiliation. 2 Given credible reports that asylum seekers entering Bulgaria and returnees under the Dublin III Regulation are likely to be detained, 1 2 The author cites, inter alia, the “Report to the Bulgarian Government on the visit to Bulgaria carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment from 18 to 29 October 2010”, Strasbourg, 15 March 2012. The author cites, inter alia, Pro Asyl, “Humiliated, ill-treated, and without protection: refugees and asylum seekers in Bulgaria”, December 2015. 3