CCPR/C/123/D/2575/2015 Annex I Joint opinion by Ilze Brands-Kehris, Sarah Cleveland, Christof Heyns and Yuval Shany (dissenting) 1. We regret that we cannot join the majority of the Committee in finding that if the author were to be deported to Italy by Denmark it would constitute a violation of the Covenant. 2. In paragraph 9.3 above, the Committee recalls that “it is generally for the organs of the States parties to the Covenant to review and evaluate facts and evidence in order to determine whether such a risk exists, unless it is found that the evaluation was clearly arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice”. The facts in that case were significantly different from the facts of the present case, which do not warrant the same legal conclusion. In Jasin v. Denmark, the author was in a particularly vulnerable situation, which made it nearly impossible for her to confront the exceptional hardships expected were she to be deported to Italy: a single mother of three small children, who herself suffered from serious asthma and required medication, had twice been denied access to medical care, had lived homeless and destitute on the street after previously being returned to Italy and whom the Italian welfare system had repeatedly failed to assist. Under those exceptional circumstances, the Committee was of the view that, without specific assurances of social assistance, Italy could not be considered a “safe country” of removal for the author and her children. 3. In the present case, it is not disputed that the author, who has one child, is entitled to renewal of her residence permit and enjoys subsidiary protection in Italy, where she lived for more than six years, found employment and was able to rent a room in an apartment for several years. Neither she nor her son have any reported health issues and she possesses an Italian health card (see paras. 5.8 and 5.11). 4. Although we consider that deportation to Italy may put the author in a more difficult situation than the one confronting her and her son in Denmark, we do not have before us information suggesting that their plight is different in nature than that of many other asylum seekers who have arrived in Europe in recent years. Nor are we in a position to hold on the basis of the information before us that the difficulties to which the author will be exposed upon deportation are likely to reach the exceptional level of harshness and irreparability that would result in a violation of article 7 of the Covenant. 5. Under these circumstances, we cannot conclude that the decision of the Danish authorities to deport the authors to Italy was arbitrary or amounted to a manifest error or denial of justice that would entail a violation of article 7 of the Covenant by Denmark. Thus, although we regret the decision of the Danish authorities not to seek individual assurances from Italy prior to the deportation of the author, we do not consider that such a decision violates the Covenant in this case. 12 GE.19-07290