CCPR/C/132/D/3266/2018 to explain what he was thinking when he realized that he was attracted to people of the same sex. The Agency further considered that his personal reflections were of a general nature without any real connection to events as perceived by him. He was moreover unable to describe in a detailed way how he experienced his alleged relationship in Sweden, even though he claimed that that relationship was an essential part of his life. In an overall assessment, the Agency concluded that the complainant had not been able to plausibly demonstrate that he belonged to a group that was at risk of persecution in Afghanistan owing to sexual orientation or ascribed sexual orientation. 4.10 The State party notes that on appeal, the Migration Court held an oral hearing to give the author the opportunity to again describe his cited need for protection owing to sexual orientation. The Court initially noted that it had been more than two years after arriving in Sweden and after his expulsion order had become final that he first cited that he was homosexual, while he claimed to have known the Swedish authorities’ view about homosexuality before arriving in Sweden. That fact had a negative impact on his credibility. Furthermore, the Court considered his account relating to his thoughts and feelings about his sexuality to be remarkably vague, even considering his cultural background. During the hearing, he was given the opportunity to develop his personal perception of and feelings regarding the alleged relationship in the Islamic Republic of Iran. He stated, inter alia, that he did not have any thoughts or feelings about being different and stated that everything had felt good and natural. He further claimed that he had lacked knowledge about the view of homosexuality in the Islamic Republic of Iran and about the different attitudes towards heterosexual and homosexual relationships. The Court noted in that regard that peoples’ thoughts and feelings relating to those kinds of questions were highly personal and individual. However, it was not deemed credible that the author lacked knowledge about views on homosexuality in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Moreover, the Court considered the complainant’s replies regarding his feelings of shame and fear after his mother had allegedly apprehended him with the boy in the Islamic Republic of Iran to be mechanical and without nuance. Taking into account all the events the author claimed to have experienced and the context in which he grew up, the Court considered that he should have been able to give a more detailed account. Consequently, the Court considered that he had not plausibly demonstrated that he belonged to a group that, owing to sexual orientation or ascribed sexual orientation, was at risk of persecution in Afghanistan. 4.11 The State party further notes that the author claimed before the Committee that he had been subjected to threats from people in Afghanistan who were relatives of the boy he had allegedly had a relationship with in the Islamic Republic of Iran when he was 13 years old. It notes that he has not submitted any evidence in support of that claim, either before the Committee or before the domestic authorities. It argues that he has not provided any reasonable explanation as to why these people would contact him several years later or by which means they could have contacted him. It submits that the author’s claims in this regard lack credibility and any corroborating evidence. 4.12 Regarding the author’s conversion from Islam to Christianity, the State party notes that when examining whether he had plausibly demonstrated that his conversion was genuine, the migration authorities made an individual assessment in accordance with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status and Guidelines on International Protection under the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees as well as a guiding judgment from the Migration Court of Appeal (case No. MIG 2011:29). An overall assessment was made of the circumstances in which the conversion took place and of whether the author could be expected to live as a convert upon his return to Afghanistan. It was taken into account that the alleged conversion to Christianity had taken place in Sweden after his expulsion order had become final, and while he was being held in detention awaiting the enforcement of his expulsion order. Since the conversion was not a continuation of religious views held before his arrival in Sweden, particular attention was paid to the credibility of the author’s cited conversion. The Migration Agency conducted an extensive asylum investigation with the author and the Migration Court held an oral hearing in order to examine the author’s faith, how he came to know about Christianity, the nature of and connection between any religious convictions held before the conversion and those he had since held, as well as any possible disaffection with the previously held religion. The Migration Agency 5