CCPR/C/119/D/2253/2013 Committee must give considerable weight to the Board’s findings, as the Board is better placed to assess the facts in the author’s case. The State party recalls that the Board considered that the credibility of the author had been weakened by contradictory information provided during his asylum proceedings, in particular regarding his departure date from the Islamic Republic of Iran and the date of the arrest of his friend A.M. In addition, the Board took into account that the author had stated that he did not consider himself as politically active and that he had left the Islamic Republic of Iran on his own authentic passport. 4.7 The State party submits that the decisions of the Refugee Appeals Board dated 28 April 2010 and 27 March 2013 were taken after a thorough review of the author’s claims and the evidence he submitted, in accordance with domestic legislation. The State party agrees with the Board insofar as it did not attach any evidential weight to the summons submitted by the author when he requested the reopening of his case, 19 as he did not explain why he submitted the document so late in the proceedings. Furthermore, he did not provide a satisfactory explanation regarding the date of the summons — 10 November 2008, after he left the Islamic Republic of Iran — or as to why he did not mention the document in his statement before the Board when he was asked whether he had received any summons. The State party further highlights that the author has not sufficiently established the probability that he would be subjected to persecution in the Islamic Republic of Iran due to his participation in the hunger strike held in May 2012 in Denmark. It submits that nothing proves that the author was exposed to the press or that he stood out to any particular degree, as he did not appear to be prominent in any of the pictures of the hunger strike to which the Board has had access. 4.8 The State party further indicates that the Refugee Appeals Board has included all relevant information in its decisions and considers that the author has not provided any additional information or evidence to the Committee sufficiently establishing the probability that his rights under article 7 of the Covenant may be violated. Regarding the author’s statement to the Committee that he had been interviewed by a film director in connection with his participation in demonstrations against the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and in the hunger strike held in May 2012 and that the film has been shown on Iranian television, the State party states that the author never mentioned the interview during the asylum proceedings, that the information is solely based on his statements and that he has not provided any satisfactory explanation as to why he did not mention the interview to the Danish authorities. Therefore, the State party submits that the information cannot be considered as fact. 4.9 The State party concludes that the author has not sufficiently established the probability that his participation in the demonstrations and the hunger strike in Denmark reflects an in-depth political interest, taking into account that he had previously stated that he was not politically active. 20 Consequently, it considers that the author has not been exposed as an opponent to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and, therefore, he would not be exposed to any risk in his country of origin. The State party further reiterates that the alleged violations of articles 19 and 26 of the Covenant have not been substantiated. Author’s comments on the State party’s observations 5.1 On 6 February 2014, the author submitted his comments on the State party’s observations. The author indicates that when he arrived at the airport in Tehran after being deported from Denmark, on 10 June 2013, he was first questioned by the passports office and then by the police. He was asked about where he had been, with whom he had been in contact, and whether he had engaged in political activities while he was abroad. He claims that he was specifically asked whether he had participated in the “Danish hunger strike” and whether he knew who had joined that hunger strike. He denied everything. He indicates that before being deported, he had injured himself to try to avoid the deportation and that, once in the Islamic Republic of Iran, he was questioned about his injuries. The author also 19 20 See para. 2.7 above. See para. 2.6 above. 7