CEDAW/C/73/D/94/2015 Service, on 10 October 2014, stated that her father had first been contacted by members of Al-Shabaab in July 2014 and had been told that her marriage was “forbidden” because the author’s husband did not work for Al-Shabaab, and he was therefore to be stoned. The author at the time stated that her father had been shot on the same day by Al-Shabaab members. However, in her interview of 10 July 2015, she stated that her father had been killed about two days after the visit because he had refused to let her go. When asked by the Immigration Service, she confirmed that her father had not been killed at the time of the first visit. The author presented different versions of the time at which her sister and nephew had been taken away by Al-Shabaab and the reason therefor. She first stated that they had intended for her to marry an Al-Shabaab member and subsequently stated that her sister was taken away because she had been mistaken for the author. There were also inconsistencies regarding whether the author had been home when her husband was taken away. In the first version, she stated that she had been present, but in the second version, she said that she had not been at home and that she had been informed about her husband by her mother-in-law. Regarding the injuries sustained by her husband, in one version, she stated that he had been injured in connection with his detention and, in another version, she said that she had been informed by her mother-in-law that he had been beaten while being taken away. Furthermore, in her initial interview, she stated that the Al-Shabaab member whom she was supposed to marry was a high-ranking official, but she provided no evidence in that regard. She also stated several times that she did not know any members of Al-Shabaab. 4.3 The State party provides detailed information on the organization, jurisdiction, composition, prerogatives, functioning and independence of the Refugee Appeals Board, as well as the legal basis for its decisions and decision -making process, the assessment of evidence and the availability of background information. It explains that, under section 7 (1–2) of the Aliens Act, a residence permit is issued to an alien upon application if the alien is covered under the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees of 1951 or if the alien risks receiving the death penalty or being subjected to torture or inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment in the case of return to his or her country of origin. The Board generally considers the conditions under section 7 (2) of the Act to be met when there are specific and individual factors substantiating that the asylum seeker will be exposed to those risks. 4.4 The State party adds that any refusal of an asylum claim must be accompanied by a decision on whether the alien in question can be removed from Denmark if he or she does not voluntarily leave the country pursuant to articles 31 and 32 (a) of the Aliens Act. It follows from section 31 (2) that no alien may be returned to a country where he or she will be at risk of persecution on the grounds set out in article 1 of the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees or if the alien will not be protected against being sent to such a country. The decisions of the Refugee Appeals Board are based on an individual and specific assessment of each case. It is for the asylum seeker to substantiate that the conditions of asylum are being met. 4.5 The State party notes that, from the case law of the Refugee Appeals Board, in order for the Board to grant residence under section 7 (2) of the Aliens Act, there must be specific and individual conditions rendering it probabl e that the relevant asylum seeker will be exposed to a real risk of the death penalty or of being subjected to 4/11 19-15435