CCPR/C/120/D/2640/2015 4.13 The State party recalls that the authors’ statements and allegations were thoroughly considered by the Danish Immigration Service and the Refugee Appeals Board, including their claims related to living conditions. The State party also stresses that the authors’ statements about reception conditions in Bulgaria are relevant only to individuals falling under the Dublin procedure, but not for the assessment whether a country can serve as the authors’ country of first asylum. In this regard, the authors’ reference to the Asylum Information Database country report for Bulgaria of January 2015 applies only to asylum seekers. 4.14 The State party adds that the authors’ assertion that they risk homelessness and may have to live on the streets if deported to Bulgaria is substantiated neither by their past experience, nor by the background information available. According to their own information, the authors were accommodated at the asylum centre after being granted residence in Bulgaria and were allowed to stay there, even though they had been told to leave the centre within 14 days and had been instructed by the police to stay elsewhere. Accordingly, the authors were not homeless during their stay in Bulgaria. The State party further observes that it appears from the UNHCR report Where is my Home? that the quality of accommodation of asylum seekers and protection status holders after leaving the registration and reception centres is directly dependent on their employment and income, but also dependent on their family status.15 In general, refugee families, in particular those with young children, encounter a more positive attitude from landlords. No cases have been recorded of families being forced to leave the registration and reception centres without being provided with accommodation, or at least with funds to rent lodgings. 4.15 With respect to the authors’ allegation based on a report that the Bulgarian authorities discontinue the payment of a monthly allowance once asylum seekers are granted residence, 16 the State party stresses that, according to the same source of information, refugees acquire the rights and obligations of Bulgarian nationals. During their own experience, the authors were provided with 65 leva per month as asylum seekers, and non-governmental information indicates that the amount granted to persons with protection status is equal to the social aid granted to Bulgarian nationals, and that recognized refugees have the right to receive financial support for up to six months after the positive decision.17 4.16 The State party further submits that the authors’ submission about the alleged lack of access to medical assistance during their stay in Bulgaria is based solely on unsubstantiated information, and is not aligned with the general information available on conditions for aliens granted protection status in Bulgaria.18 The same is true of the authors’ submission that they risk having only limited access to health care if deported to Bulgaria. 19 Information indicates that, under Bulgarian legislation, beneficiaries of international protection are entitled to the same social assistance and services as Bulgarian nationals, and they also have the same health-care rights and the right to health insurance of their own choice. 20 The State party further observes that the authors neither requested nor needed medical assistance or health-care services in Bulgaria. 4.17 As regards the authors’ information about racially motivated assaults and rhetoric, the State party observes that the Bulgarian Government has addressed and condemned racist attacks and rhetoric and notes that, on 14 February 2014 following the attack on the Dzhumaya Mosque in Plovdiv, the Government published a second joint declaration calling for guarantees of civil, ethnic and religious peace and the police detained over 120 people in connection with the attack.21 The State party also observes in this respect that the authors 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 UNHCR, Where is my Home?, p. 6. Human Rights Watch, “Containment Plan”, p. 5. Asylum Information Database, Country Report — Bulgaria (January 2015), p. 41. See, for example, UNHCR, Where is my Home?, p. 24. The State party refers to two reports: Bulgaria as a Country of Asylum and Tsvetelina Hristova and others, Trapped in Europe’s Quagmire: the Situation of Asylum Seekers and Refugees in Bulgaria (Munich, Bordermonitoring.eu, 2014), from which it appears that refugees in Bulgaria have access to health-care services and that medical treatment is free if the asylum-seekers register with a general practitioner. UNHCR, Monitoring Report. The State party cites Bulgaria as a Country of Asylum, p. 14. 7