CCPR/C/120/D/2601/2015 Consideration of the merits 9.1 The Committee notes the author’s claims that, if removed to Iraq, he would face the risk of being killed or exposed to torture or ill-treatment, due to a combination of several personal risk factors. Those factors include the author’s desertion from the army in 2002 and that some old soldiers may still remember him as a “traitor” and desire revenge; the family’s affiliation with the Dulaimy tribe; the prominence of some of the family members under the Saddam Hussein regime; suspicious circumstances surrounding the sudden death of the author’s sister B., who was reportedly a respected and active member of the Baath Party and a long-time career government official; and the author’s fear of a high-ranking member of the Iraqi parliament and Shia militia leader, Hakim Al-Zameli. The Committee also notes the author’s fear of persecution in the context of tensions between Sunni and Shia Muslims, exacerbated by ISIL, which a number of persons from the Dulaimy tribe had joined. The Committee also takes note that, according to the author, he is a familiar figure among Iraqis in Denmark, that he was the subject of several interviews and that his story was reproduced in two books. The Committee further notes the State party’s argument that the Board made an overall assessment of the specific circumstances of the author’s case compared to the background information on the situation in Iraq and found, on the basis of its assessment of the threat, that the author is not facing any threat that would justify asylum in Denmark and that his removal to Iraq would not constitute a breach of articles 6 and 7 of the Covenant. 9.2 The Committee recalls its general comment No. 31 (2004) on the nature of the general legal obligation imposed on States parties to the Covenant in which it refers to the obligation of States parties not to extradite, deport, expel or otherwise remove a person from their territory when there are substantial grounds for believing that there is a real risk of irreparable harm such as that contemplated by articles 6 and 7 of the Covenant (para. 12). The Committee has also indicated that the risk must be personal 23 and that there is a high threshold for providing substantial grounds to establish that a real risk of irreparable harm exists. Thus, all relevant facts and circumstances must be considered, including the general human rights situation in the author’s country of origin.24 The Committee recalls that it is generally for the organs of States parties to examine the facts and evidence of the case in order to determine whether such a risk exists, unless it can be established that the assessment was arbitrary or amounted to a manifest error or denial of justice. 25 9.3 The Committee observes that the author’s claims were thoroughly examined by the State party’s authorities. Nonetheless, the Committee observes that the author left Iraq more than 15 years ago and that he has alleged that a combination of several personal factors put him at risk, including his desertion from the army for which he may attract revenge, his family’s affiliation with the Dulaimy tribe, the prominence of some of the family members under the Saddam Hussein regime and suspicious circumstances surrounding the sudden death of the author’s sister B., who was a long-time career government official. The Committee also notes that the author’s credibility regarding his account of the persecution he suffered and the risks that he runs has never been questioned by the authorities of the State party, and that there are substantial grounds to believe that he would be viewed as a Western sympathizer and therefore attract a risk of persecution. The Committee further notes that the situation in the author’s home city of Baghdad has deteriorated, as admitted by the State party. Considering the author’s age, his political campaigning in Denmark, 26 the surging sectarian violence between Shias and Sunnis in Iraq, often targeting Sunni men, including in Baghdad, and the fact that most of his relatives have fled from Iraq, the Committee finds, in the circumstances of the present case, that the author’s deportation to Iraq would amount to a violation of articles 6 (1) and 7 of the Covenant. 23 24 25 26 See K. v. Denmark, para. 7.3; and communications No. 2272/2013, P.T. v. Denmark, Views adopted on 1 April 2015, para. 7.2; and No. 2007/2010, X. v. Denmark, Views adopted on 26 March 2014, para. 9.2. See X. v. Denmark, para. 9.2; and communication No. 1833/2008, X. v. Sweden, Views adopted on 1 November 2011, para. 5.18. See, inter alia, K. v. Denmark, para. 7.4. Which included denouncing tensions between Sunni and Shia Muslims. 11