CCPR/C/127/D/3070/2017 that he would go into hiding.9 He appealed the detention decision to the Migration Court of Appeal, which rejected the appeal on 19 July, because there were still grounds for detention.10 2.5 On 20 August 2017, the author applied for a temporary residence permit under chapter 12, section 18, of the Aliens Act and re-examination of his asylum claim under chapter 12, section 19, thereof, in the light of “new circumstances”, citing impediments to the enforcement of the expulsion order.11 The author alleged that his mental and physical health had worsened 12 and that he had no religious affiliation, network or support in Afghanistan, in addition to his belonging to the Hazara ethnic minority group, which is subject to discrimination and violence in Afghanistan. He also submitted that the security situation in Afghanistan was seriously worsening. 2.6 In its decision of 21 August 2017, the Migration Board decided not to grant the author a residence permit under chapter 12, section 18, of the Aliens Act and also decided not to re-examine the issue of a residence permit under chapter 12, section 19, thereof.13 The Migration Board considered that there were no new circumstances which might be presumed to constitute such permanent impediments to enforcement as referred to in chapter 12 of the Aliens Act. The decision was concluded without a hearing of the author in person on the matter of his religious beliefs. 2.7 On 22 August 2017, the author appealed the decision to the Migration Court, emphasizing that he was an atheist. He claimed that he came to believe in no religion, as the result of a gradual process while he lived in Sweden, and that a return to Afghanistan would 9 10 11 12 13 The author did not wish to cooperate with facilitating a return to his country of origin. The author notes that, during his custody in the deportation centre, the staff feared that he would commit suicide, given that he had previously attempted to do so. According to the State party, on 7 and 8 July 2017, a “suicide screening” of the author took place, followed by a dialogue regarding the need for extra supervision on 23 July. The author alleges that, although he was put in a solitary cell in the beginning of the term of custody, he was placed with other deportees after the meeting with a psychologist and prescribed medicine. Chapter 12, sections 18 and 19, of the Aliens Act, which entered into force on 31 March 2006. According to the Act, even when an expulsion order becomes final, if there are “new circumstances” that can be assumed to constitute an impediment to enforcement under chapter 12, sections 1, 2 or 3, of the Act, the Migration Agency may grant a temporary residence permit and order a stay of enforcement (chap. 12, sect. 18, of the Act). In addition, the matter of a residence permit may be reexamined at the enforcement stage if an alien submits “new circumstances” that can be assumed to constitute a lasting impediment to enforcement, as referred to in chapter 12, sections 1, 2 or 3, of the Aliens Act, namely, that there is a risk of the death penalty, torture or persecution (chap. 12, sect. 19, of the Aliens Act). A re-examination requires that the alien could not previously have cited those circumstances or that the alien shows a valid excuse for not having done so (chap. 12, sect. 19, of the Aliens Act). In his request to stay the enforcement of the order, the author alleged that he had difficulty sleeping and resting and was suffering from severe anxiety and depression. He received prescription medicine for treating depression on several occasions. He also alleges that he has problems with his liver but does not specify the nature or seriousness of those problems. The Migration Agency found that the author’s mental health and psychological diagnosis was not serious to a level to constitute the impediment of the enforcement of the expulsion order. The Agency noted that there was nothing to indicate that his suicidal ideation was based on severe mental illhealth, given that no medical certificates concerning his mental health had been submitted. It noted that the author’s suicidal ideation appeared rather to be an expression of disappointment or desperation in connection with the enforcement of the expulsion order, therefore it could not constitute grounds for granting him a residence permit. As for the author’s ethnicity, religious affiliation and lack of a network in Afghanistan, the Agency found that those elements had been examined by the migration authorities and were not new circumstances constituting an impediment to enforcement within the meaning of chapter 12, sections 1, 2 or 3, of the Aliens Act. The Agency also noted that the general security situation in Afghanistan had not changed since the expulsion order had become final and non-appealable in such a way that anyone who was expelled to the country would risk being subjected to indiscriminate violence or that the security situation in itself constituted an impediment to enforcement under chapter 12, sections 1, 2 or 3, of the Aliens Act. 3