CCPR/C/120/D/2640/2015 Thus, over 90 per cent of the registered refugee children were not enrolled in the municipal school system. The bureaucratic administration and the difficulties of enrolment in the mandatory language course constitute a de facto violation of the children’s right to education, say the authors. 5.8 The authors reiterate that the Committee’s Views in Jasin et al. v. Denmark are relevant in their situation. As in that case, it was wrong of the State party to assume that, as holders of valid residence permits in Bulgaria, the authors would benefit from their theoretical rights and social benefits. It is up to the State party to undertake an individualized assessment on the actual risk faced in case of deportation. As such, there were procedural defects in the Refugee Appeals Board’s assessment, which is why the authors have resorted to the Committee. State party’s additional observations 6.1 On 4 November 2016, the State party provided additional observations, generally referring to its observations of 8 February 2015. It reiterates that the Refugee Appeals Board made a full and thorough assessment of all the circumstances of the case, including an assessment of the information in the case at hand, in conjunction with the information on conditions in the country of first asylum. It asserts that the authors have not established that the assessment made by the Refugee Appeals Board is clearly arbitrary or manifestly illfounded. 6.2 According to the State party, the various cases cited by the authors in which the Board determined that Bulgaria could not serve as the country of first asylum do not reflect arbitrariness, but rather the fact that the Board makes a specific and individual assessment in each individual case. The finding made by the Board in the case at hand, that Bulgaria can serve as the authors’ country of first asylum, was thus based on a specific assessment of the circumstances in this case. 6.3 The State party refers to the Committee’s jurisprudence 27 and distinguishes the present case from that of Jasin et al. v. Denmark, previously considered by the Committee, which concerned the deportation of a single mother who suffered from asthma, required medication and had three minor children, and whose residence permit for Italy had expired. The State party stresses that the case at hand concerns the deportation of a married couple with four children, two of whom are adults; that none of the family members suffers from any diseases requiring medical treatment; and that all family members have been granted residence permits in Bulgaria. The State party further notes that the authors have failed to specify any irregularity in domestic decision-making by the Bulgarian authorities, and refers to the case of A.A.I. and A.H.A. v. Denmark (communication No. 2402/2014, Views adopted by the Committee on 29 March 2016), in which the Committee found that it was not contrary to article 7 of the Covenant to deport a married couple and their two minor children to Italy, where they had all previously been issued with residence permits. According to the State party, the same reasoning should apply in the case at hand. 6.4 As for the background information referred to by the authors, the State party notes that the same information was included in the other background material on Bulgaria available to the Refugee Appeals Board, and was thus also taken into account in the Board’s assessment of the authors’ case. Issues and proceedings before the Committee Consideration of admissibility 7.1 Before considering any claim contained in a communication, the Human Rights Committee must decide, in accordance with rule 93 of its rules of procedure, whether or not the communication is admissible under the Optional Protocol to the Covenant. 27 10 The State party further refers to the individual dissenting opinion of Committee members Yuval Shany, Konstantine Vardzelashvili and Sir Nigel Rodley in the case of Abdilafir Abubakar Ali and Mayul Ali Mohamad v. Denmark (communication No. 2409/2014, Views adopted on 29 March 2016).

Select target paragraph3