CCPR/C/133/D/3212/2018 Advance unedited version 9.6 Under the circumstances of the present case, the Committee is of the view that the State party’s interference with the author’s family life and the ensuing insufficient protection afforded to the family generated excessive hardship for the author, his wife and their minor child. The issuance of an expulsion order against the author in the circumstances of his case presented him with no prospect for reunification in the foreseeable future either in Australia or in Sri Lanka, which has inevitably led to the breaking up of the family unit. 9.7 The Committee therefore considers that the expulsion order issued against the author, although pursuing a legitimate aim, constituted disproportionate interference with his family life, which cannot be justified by the abstract reasons invoked by the State party to remove him to Sri Lanka. 10. The Committee, acting under article 5 (4) of the Optional Protocol, is of the view that the facts before it disclose a violation by the State party of article 17, read in conjunction with article 23 (1), of the Covenant. 11. Pursuant to article 2 (3) (a) of the Covenant, the State party is under an obligation to provide the author with an effective remedy. This requires it to make full reparation to individuals whose Covenant rights have been violated. Accordingly, the State party is obligated, inter alia, to proceed to a review of the author’s case taking into account the State party’s obligations under the Covenant and the Committee’s present Views, to arrange for the author’s return to Australia, if he so wishes, and to provide adequate compensation. 18 The State party is also under an obligation to take steps to prevent similar violations in the future. 12. Bearing in mind that, by becoming a party to the Optional Protocol, the State party has recognized the competence of the Committee to determine whether there has been a violation of the Covenant and that, pursuant to article 2 of the Covenant, the State party has undertaken to ensure to all individuals within its territory and subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognized in the Covenant and to provide an effective remedy when it has been determined that a violation has occurred, the Committee wishes to receive from the State party, within 180 days, information about the measures taken to give effect to the Committee’s Views. The State party is also requested to publish the present Views and disseminate them widely in the official language of the State party. 18 8 A.H. v. Denmark (CCPR/C/114/D/2370/2014), para. 10.; X. v. Sweden (CCPR/C/103/D/1833/2008), para. 11.