CCPR/C/113/D/2192/2012 was taken in his absence, was unlawful. He also maintains that the subsequent court reviews disregarded that fact and extended his detention regardless of his appeals. 2.5 On 24 March 2012, the Deputy Procurator General of the Russian Federation issued a ruling ordering the author’s extradition to Kyrgyzstan. On 11 April 2012, the author appealed the ruling before the Moscow City Court, alleging, inter alia, that, if returned to Kyrgyzstan, he would be subjected to torture. On 25 June 2012, the appeal was rejected. On the same date, the author filed a cassation appeal before the Supreme Court, which the latter rejected on 15 August 2012. 2.6 On 6 December 2011, the author filed an application for refugee status in the Russian Federation. On 28 February 2012, the Moscow Department of the Federal Migration Service rejected his application. On 19 April 2012, the author appealed the decision before the Federal Migration Service, which rejected his appeal on 8 June 2012. On 17 July 2012, the author appealed the rejection before the Basmanny Court in Moscow. The author submits that, by the date of his initial submission to the Committee, the court had not issued a decision on that appeal, but he maintains that, in the existence of an extradition decision that has entered into force, his extradition may be carried out at any time, because of a gap in domestic legislation. He maintains that, while a ruling of the plenum of the Supreme Court of 14 June 2012 specifies that a deportation should be stayed during an appeal of a decision to deny refugee status, the above ruling is only obligatory for the courts of general jurisdiction. He maintains that the ruling is not binding upon the Оffice of the Procurator General and that the latter may implement the extradition order, since extraditions fall within its jurisdiction. He submits that the Russian authorities only stay executions of extradition orders in cases where an interim measures request had been issued. 2.7 The author maintains that if he is returned to Kyrgyzstan he will be immediately arrested and subjected to torture in order to be made to confess committing crimes that he did not commit. He refers to the past instances when he had been subjected to torture and refers to sources describing the systematic use of torture by the police in Kyrgyzstan. 2.8 The author contends that he has exhausted all available and effective domestic remedies. 2.9 On 8 August 2012, the author submitted an application to the European Court of Human Rights, with a request for interim measures. On 14 August 2012, the Court informed him that the interim measures request had been rejected. On 21 August 2012, the author withdrew his application to the Court. The complaint 3. The author claims to be a victim of violations by the Russian Federation of his rights under article 9 of the Covenant and maintains that, if the Russian Federation proceeds with his extradition, that would constitute a violation of his rights under article 7 of the Covenant. Author’s further submissions 4.1 On 12 November 2012, the author’s counsel informed the Committee that the latter had been moved to a detention centre in the Omsk region. She submitted that a refugee 4