CRC/C/80/D/4/2016 by the Malian consulate in Madrid on 3 October 2015.21 The State party has treated the author appropriately, as an unaccompanied minor, since recognizing his correct age, which was confirmed in July 2015. At that time, the State party assumed legal guardianship of the author and recognized him as a minor of Malian nationality, as stated in the certificate of guardianship issued by the Community of Madrid 22 and his Spanish residence permit.23 In accordance with the principle of venire contra factum proprium, or estoppel, the State party cannot claim that the author is not a minor because it has already recognized and treated him as a minor. 5.4 The author further submits that the communication is admissible rationae materiae because his claims are not based on his right to asylum. 5.5 The author reiterates that there were no effective domestic remedies available that he could have exhausted. He notes that the only effective remedies are those that have suspensive effect. He submits that the irreparable harm caused by an unlawful deportation occurs immediately after expulsion, hence the need for the remedy to have suspensive effect in order to be considered effective. 24 The author maintains that: (a) before his deportation, he did not receive a formal deportation order or decision that he could have challenged before an administrative or judicial authority and, since his deportation was immediate and summary, he did not have access to any form of legal assistance or available remedy that would have had suspensive effect; (b) after his deportation, he did not have access to an effective or even potential remedy, as it would not have had suspensive effect because the deportation had already been carried out.25 He argues, in addition, that all the remedies invoked by the State party are also ineffective because they would not remedy the alleged violations of his rights in relation to the events that occurred on 2 December 2014. 5.6 The author submits that his entry into Spain on 30 December 2014 and the subsequent immigration formalities are irrelevant to the present communication. Additional observations from the parties on admissibility 6.1 In its observations of 22 March 2017, the State party argues that the person who entered Spain on 30 December 2014 is not the minor, and author of this communication, who has been receiving official assistance from the Spanish authorities. The State party notes that the passport submitted by the author was issued on 3 October 2015 and includes a photograph of him that was taken when he was already residing in Spain and receiving assistance from the Spanish child protection authorities. The State party claims that “a simple comparison” of the author’s passport photograph (corresponding to D.D.) and the photograph on the identification card issued by Melilla police centre for foreign nationals (corresponding to Y.D., who allegedly entered Spain on 30 December 2014) shows that the author is a different person from the one who climbed over the Melilla border fence on 30 December 2014. The State party maintains that “any immigrant who scales the fence and breaches the border protection mechanism is identified by the Spanish authorities”. Accordingly, it claims that, if the author had scaled the border fence illegally, “his details would be on record, together with a photograph of him taken on the same date at Melilla police centre and upon his admission to the temporary reception centre for migrants”. The State party also asserts that the author has not proved that he took part in an assault on the border fence in Melilla and that there is no record of how he entered Spain. The State party also submits that the facts cannot be admitted on the basis of the author’s mere claim that he is a minor. 21 22 23 24 25 6 The author provides as proof a copy of his Malian passport, his birth certificate and his Spanish residence permit. The author provides a copy of the certificate dated 18 November 2015 in which the Community of Madrid assumes legal guardianship of the author. The author provides as evidence his Spanish residence permit bearing his date of birth: 10 March 1999, confirming his Malian nationality and bearing the words “under the guardianship of the Community of Madrid”. The author cites Tebourski v. France, para. 7.4, and Choudhary v. Canada, para. 8.3. The author cites Arkauz Arana v. France, para. 6.1. GE.19-07971