CCPR/C/121/D/2487/2014 assessment officer’s decision after a thorough review of the author’s evidence and arguments. 4.7 The State party recalls the Committee’s consistent jurisprudence that “important weight should be given to the assessment conducted by the State party” and submits that the Committee should therefore follow the findings of the assessment officer and the Federal Court.10 The State party adds that the author has not provided evidence to demonstrate that the conduct of the proceeding at issue or the evaluation of the facts and evidence was manifestly arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice. 4.8 The State party considers that, throughout the years, the author’s accounts of his experience prior to his departure from Sri Lanka in 2011 contain numerous inconsistencies and that the Committee should therefore not rely on them, or should consider that the author’s allegations are insufficiently substantiated. In this connection, the State party argues that the letters and news articles provided by the author do not support his claims: none of the letters mention that the author was present at the Katunayake Free Trade Zone demonstration or that he witnessed the death of R.C., or provided evidence in that regard. Similarly, none of the news articles mention the author, not even the article posted on the World Socialist Web Site dated 23 June 2011, which provides detailed information about a judicial inquiry and a police investigation that were taking place at the time the article was published, and which includes the names of a number of people who participated in the demonstration and who provided testimony to the Negombo Magistrate Court in charge of the investigation.11 4.9 The State party also submits that in his May 2012 affidavit, which constitutes the author’s first statement to the State party’s authorities about what happened to him in Sri Lanka, the author did not mention that he had been present at the Katunayake Free Trade Zone demonstration and that he had witnessed his cousin’s murder, or that he had provided evidence about the murder. Instead, the author stated that he and others had signed a petition which they gave to their priest to file with the Asian Human Rights Commission as part of a protest against the police who killed his “close family member”, after which he and other petitioners were targeted by government goons and the police. The author did not identify the “close family member” as R.C. or that he was his cousin. 4.10 Regarding the author’s claim that he witnessed the death of R.C. during the police shootout and that he arranged for an ambulance to take R.C. to the hospital but that it was too late and that he therefore died, the State party submits that, in the 23 June 2011 article, it is reported that an individual referred to as S.F. and a colleague took R.C. to the factory and that the police came and took him away in a jeep. R.C. was apparently left untreated and bled for two hours in police custody before being taken to the hospital where he died two days later. Another World Socialist Web Site article, dated 6 June 2011, reports these same details.12 4.11 Concerning the author’s claim that he was “the only eyewitness” to the murder, the State party submits that, in the personal narrative he provided as part of his pre-removal risk assessment application in 2012, he described himself as “one of the few eyewitnesses”. In the State party’s view, even if the author was a witness to the murder of R.C., he was not the only one: at the very least, the victim’s girlfriend was also a witness, as were S.F. and his colleague, and the other people mentioned in the 23 June 2011 article. Given the large number of people that were reportedly at the demonstration, the State party submits that there were probably many witnesses to the shooting. Referring to an article dated 4 July 2012 in The Island, the State party reports that, apparently, 270 demonstrators were 10 11 12 See, for example, communication No. 2007/2010, X. v. Denmark, Views adopted on 26 March 2014, para. 9.3. W.A. Sunil and Ruwan Liyanage, “Sri Lankan court examines police shooting of FTZ worker”, World Socialist Web Site, 23 June 2011. “Thousands attend funeral of slain Sri Lankan FTZ worker”, World Socialist Web Site, 6 June 2011. 5