CCPR/C/114/D/2389/2014 2.7 The author notes that decisions of the refugee appeals board are not subject to appeal before national courts according to article 56 (8) of the Aliens Act, and that he therefore has exhausted all available domestic remedies.11 The complaint 3.1 The author contends that his deportation would entail a violation of article 7 of the Covenant. He claims that his deportation to the Islamic Republic of Iran would put him at risk of being subject to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, given that he has always lived in refugee camps in Iraq, such as the Al-Tash and Barika camps, which are considered as affiliated to Kurdish political parties. He argues that he will be automatically perceived by Iranian authorities as a political activist and supporter of such parties for the following reasons: (a) his membership of the Kurdistan Freedom Party; (b) his participation in activities organized by the Kurdistan Freedom Party, the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan and Komala and in Kurd festivities celebrated in Northern Iraq; (c) the fact that his father is a member of the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan; and (d) his own participation in meetings of the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan. He further argues that there is an intense presence of the Iranian intelligence service in Iraq, and that Iranian authorities therefore know of any political activity taking place there. 3.2 Similarly, the author claims that the fact that he lived in the Al-Tash and Barika refugee camps will entail a presumption by the Iranian authorities that he has information about Kurdish parties active in the camps. In compliance with their common practice, the Iranian intelligence service will require him to provide information and, if he refuses, he will be accused of being a spy and be persecuted. 3.3 The author adds that the fact that he is not registered in the Islamic Republic of Iran, has no identification documents and does not speak Farsi increases the risk or persecution, in violation of article 7 of the Convention. He mentions that the treatment of returning Kurds by Iranian authorities is unpredictable and that the risk of being subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is especially high for persons who have his profile. 3.4 The author further claims that he supports the Kurdish cause, fighting for an independent Kurdistan and the rights of Kurds. If returned to the Islamic Republic of Iran, he will have to refrain from expressing support to the Kurdish cause in order to avoid persecution, in violation of his freedom of expression.12 3.5 Finally, the author argues that the refugee appeals board, in its decision of 18 March 2014, violated his right to equal protection of the law under article 26 of the Covenant insofar as the decision of the board to grant asylum to his brother was made solely on the basis that he had resided in the Al-Tash and Barika refugee camps, as the author himself had done, and the conditions of his case were similar to those of his brother. The author therefore considers that the board should have reached the same conclusion in both cases. The author alleges that the consequences of deportation to the Islamic Republic of Iran would be very serious because, based on the legitimate expectation that he would be granted asylum in Denmark, as his brother had been in 2010, he had renounced his refugee status in Iraq and would therefore not be able to return there. 11 12 The author refers to CERD/C/DEN/CO/17, para. 13. The author does not make reference to article 19 of the Covenant, but implicitly invokes this article in his claim. 5