CCPR/C/119/D/2253/2013 the Islamic Republic of Iran without a passport containing an exit visa, 12 and given the author’s background, namely, that he is a person of Kurdish origin who carried out illegal activities (smuggling material from the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan into the country) before leaving the Islamic Republic of Iran, and his engagement in political activities against the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran while he was in Denmark, the author states that he would be exposed to a further risk of persecution. 13 3.3 The author claims that the State party would also violate article 19 of the Covenant since, if returned to the Islamic Republic of Iran, he would not be able to express his sympathy for Kurdish political parties and freely express his opinions, which would breach his right to freedom of expression. In addition, the author fears that his right to live free of discrimination, enshrined in article 26 of the Covenant, would also be violated, given the situation of Kurds in the Islamic Republic of Iran and taking into account his political support for Kurdish organizations. State party’s observations 4.1 On 12 December 2013, the State party submitted its observations on the admissibility and merits of the communication. It submits that the communication is not substantiated, as the author has not demonstrated any possible breach of the Covenant resulting from his deportation to the Islamic Republic of Iran. 4.2 The State party describes the structure, composition and functioning of the Refugee Appeals Board,14 as well as the legislation applying to asylum proceedings. 15 The Board analyses whether an asylum applicant may have a well-founded fear of being subjected to specific and individual persecution or to a risk of such persecution upon return to his or her country of origin, taking into account any information on persecution prior to the asylum seeker’s departure from his or her country of origin (sect. 7 (1) of the Aliens Act), and also considers whether an alien risks being subjected to the death penalty or to torture or illtreatment if returned to his or her country of origin. The Board considers the conditions for issuing a residence permit met when there are specific and individual factors rendering it probable that the asylum seeker will be exposed to a real risk of death or of being subjected to torture or ill-treatment in case of return (sect. 7 (2) of the Aliens Act). 4.3 The State party argues that the author has failed to establish a prima facie case for the purposes of admissibility in respect of the alleged violation of article 7 of the Covenant, since he has not substantiated that he has faced any risk or danger following his deportation to the Islamic Republic of Iran; therefore, his allegations under this provision should be considered ill-founded. Regarding his allegations under article 19, the State party refers to the author’s statement that States parties are obliged to not deport persons who are at risk of deprivation of their rights, including their freedom of expression, which encompasses the possibility of sympathizing with and expressing the views of Kurdish political parties. The State party indicates that the author has not elaborated on that statement as to how his freedom of expression has been or would be violated by his deportation, and thus those allegations should be considered inadmissible for lack of substantiation. As for the author’s allegations under article 26 of the Covenant, the State party refers to the author’s statement that, as a result of his deportation, his right to live as a Kurd without discrimination has been violated. The State party points out that the author has not elaborated further on that statement and requests that the allegation be considered inadmissible for lack of substantiation. 12 13 14 15 Ibid. The author refers to the joint report of the Danish Immigration Service, the Norwegian Country of Origin Information Centre (LANDINFO) and the Danish Refugee Council, entitled “On conversion to Christianity: issues concerning Kurds and post-2009 election protestors as well as legal issues and exit procedures” (2013), available at www.nyidanmark.dk/nr/rdonlyres/a8c2c897-1ca9-49d1-ba32ec3e599d646d/0/iranendeligudgave.pdf. According to the joint report, there is no information available regarding the situation of deportees in the Islamic Republic of Iran, as the International Organization for Migration deals only with persons who have voluntarily returned to the country. See communication No. 2379/2014, Obah Hussein Ahmed v. Denmark, Views adopted on 7 July 2016, paras. 4.1-4.3. The State party refers to sections 7 (1) and (2) and 31 (1) and (2) of the Aliens Act. 5