CCPR/C/123/D/2423/2014 of Refugees” which states, inter alia, that “where individuals convert after their departure from the country of origin, this may have the effect of creating a sur place claim. In such situations, particular credibility concerns tend to arise and a rigorous and in-depth examination of the circumstances and genuineness of the conversion will be necessary.” 4.10 Having explaining the elements taken into account by the Danish Refugee Appeals Board when assessing whether a conversion should be deemed genuine, 10 the State party indicates that the Refugee Appeals Board considered that the author’s factual knowledge did not demonstrate a genuine and deep conviction. According to the Refugee Appeals Board’s decision of 27 March 2014, the majority of its members attached considerable importance to the author’s inconsistent statements on his original ground for asylum and to the fact that his statements on his conversion differed on essential points. This was the case, in particular, in respect of his family’s reaction to his conversion and the time of his first meeting with Z.A., another asylum seeker who according to his statement had introduced him to Christianity, and the issue of when the author considered himself to have converted. Against that background, it was the opinion of the majority of the members of the Refugee Appeals Board that the author had not shown any interest in the Christian faith until after his application for asylum had been refused by the Danish Immigration Service, and therefore the majority of them found that the author’s conversion was not the result of a natural development within him. 4.11 The State party places special emphasis on the moment at which the author had his first conversation with Z.A., given that he has stated several times that the conversation made a deep impression on him and that it was from that day that he went from being a practising Muslim to perceiving himself as a Christian. That conversation, therefore, had great significance for the author, according to his own statement, but he still made inconsistent statements to the Danish immigration authorities as to when it took place. 4.12 In particular, when interviewed by the Danish Immigration Service on 19 November 2013 about his new asylum claim based on conversion, the author stated, inter alia, that his conversation with Z.A. had taken place in February 2013, and that he had met her after he had received the refusal from the Immigration Service, even if he did not recall exactly how long after. During the review of the interview report, the author stated again that he had become a Christian in February 2013 after his conversation with Z.A. When asked, he confirmed that his conversation with Z.A. had occurred after he had received the refusal from the Immigration Service. However, at the hearing before the Danish Refugee Appeals Board on 27 March 2014, the author stated that he had met Z.A. in December 2012 — that is, before the first refusal by the Immigration Service, on 4 January 2013 — and declared that this was also what he had stated when interviewed by the Immigration Service on 19 November 2013. Considering the importance that the author has attached to his first conversation with Z.A., according to his own statements, as well as his educational and personal background, the State party finds that the author must be expected to be able to better recall the exact date of the conversation. This applies even more so because the author has repeatedly stated that his entire development as a Christian was based on that conversation. The State party also finds that the decision made by the Immigration Service on 4 January 2013 refusing asylum to the author is an event of such significance that the author must be expected to be able to recall the timing of the two events relative to each other. 4.13 The State party also draws attention to the fact that, further to his statement at the Danish Refugee Appeals Board hearing of 27 March 2014 that he had met Z.A. in December 2012, the author was asked why he had not mentioned her when he was subsequently interviewed by the Danish Immigration Service on 3 January 2013, and he replied that, at the time, he had been in the process of reading the Bible. However, the 10 6 The Danish Refugee Appeals Board makes an overall assessment of the circumstances of each asylum case in which an asylum seeker claims to have converted, including the asylum seeker’s educational background, knowledge of Christianity, motives for the conversion, considerations of the consequences of converting and participation in religious activities, as well as the asylum seeker’s general credibility and the entire process preceding the conversion. Statements from persons who have met the asylum seeker in a church context are also included in the analysis.