Annex I [Original: French] Individual opinion (dissenting) of Committee member Yadh Ben Achour 1. I am regrettably unable to agree with the Committee’s Views in the case A.S.M. and R.A.H. v. Denmark, the subject of communication No. 2378/2014. The Committee concluded that “the removal of the authors and their children to Italy would not violate their rights under article 7 of the Covenant”. In my view, there is in this case a risk of a violation of article 7 if the authors are expelled to Italy. 2. As in the Jasin case (communication No. 2360/2014), expelling the authors and their three minor children to Italy would expose them to a considerable risk of irreparable harm. It is true that the authors were granted financial assistance and social accommodation by the Italian authorities, that they obtained from the commune of Palagiano a flat for six months under the “Koine” project, that they lived in various centres for asylum seekers for three months and that they were issued sickness insurance cards and were allowed access to medical care. 3. On the other hand, however, this family faced deplorable living conditions in Italy, as described in paragraphs 2.5 to 2.8 of the Views. The family, and especially the husband, lived in the street; the husband was unable to attend his wife when she gave birth, and he was unable to find a job or could take on only underpaid or unpaid illegal work. 4. Since they came to Denmark, the family has grown with the arrival of a third child, which can only aggravate the family’s situation and its degree of vulnerability in the event of expulsion. As I had occasion to comment in the case A.A.I and A.H.A. v. Denmark (communication No. 2402/2014), this situation of aggravated vulnerability, added to the demonstrable inadequacy of the living conditions of asylum seekers and refugees in Italy, reveal for the authors a real risk of being subjected to treatment which is contrary to article 7 of the Covenant. The presence of children, the suffering due to uprooting and the degree of vulnerability of the family in the country of first asylum constitute decisive factors for the evaluation of risk. The Committee has not taken these factors sufficiently into account. 12 GE.17-20685