CAT/C/53/D/492/2012 Christians have been arrested and detained over the past few years, and that many churches, especially Protestant evangelical houses of worship, currently operate in a climate of fear.24 According to the information contained in those reports, (a) members of religious minorities, including Christians, are detained and subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and prolonged solitary confinement in order to coerce confession, often without access to a lawyer;25 (b) most cases involving Christians are tried in revolutionary courts for national security crimes, but some Christians face charges in public criminal courts for manifestation of religious beliefs, and officials routinely threaten to prosecute Christian converts for apostasy;26 (c) prosecutions often fail to meet international standards, with access to case files and the right to present a defence being limited;27 and (d) the Iranian authorities at the highest level have designated informal “house churches” and evangelical Christians as threats to national security. 28 Current reports also suggest increased persecution of Protestant Christians, including their detention for involvement in informal house churches29 and physical and intense psychological abuse, including threats of execution, of Christian converts in detention.30 8.8 In the light of all those circumstances, including the general human rights situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran, the personal situation of the complainant, who continues his active engagement in political activities against the Iranian regime abroad, and the Committee’s jurisprudence,31 the Committee is of the opinion that the complainant could well have attracted the attention of the Iranian authorities. The Committee is of the view that the complainant’s conversion to Christianity and his affiliation with Kurdish political activists compound the risk that he will be persecuted if he is returned to the Islamic Republic of Iran. In the light of those considerations, taken as a whole, the Committee considers that in the particular circumstances of the present case, there are substantial grounds for believing that the complainant would risk being subjected to torture if he were returned to the Islamic Republic of Iran. Moreover, the Committee notes that, since the Islamic Republic of Iran is not a party to the Convention, in the event of a violation of the complainant’s Convention rights in that State, he would be deprived of the legal option of recourse to the Committee for protection of any kind. 9. The Committee against Torture, acting under article 22, paragraph 7, of the Convention, concludes that the deportation of the complainant to the Islamic Republic of Iran would constitute a violation of article 3 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 10 Ibid., paras. 39–41 and A/69/356, paras. 42–48. See also the press release of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, who expressed “deep concern over the arrest and detention of hundreds of Christians over the past few years” and called on the authorities to “ease the current climate of fear in which many churches operate, especially protestant evangelical houses of worship” (20 September 2012). Available from www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/ DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=12551&LangID=E#sthash.MU9FGkH3.dpuf. See A/HRC/25/61, para. 36. Ibid., para. 41. Ibid., para. 36. Ibid., para. 40. A/69/356, para. 47. Ibid., para. 48. See communications No. 339/2008, Amini v.Denmark, decision adopted on 15 November 2010, para. 9.8; No. 357/2008 Jahani v. Switzerland, footnote 11, para. 9.4; and No. 381/2009, Faragollah et al. v. Switzerland, footnote 11, para. 9.6.