CCPR/C/114/D/2393/2014 departure were considered implausible by the RAB. The State party adds that no new information has been brought to the Committee. 4.5 The State party notes that the RAB did find as a proven fact that the author had been employed as an interpreter for the United States forces in Afghanistan and that he therefore belonged to a group of persons who “might generally be at risk of abuse by the Taliban and other groups fighting against international and Afghan authorities”. However, the RAB found that this could not by itself justify granting a residence permit. When assessing the specific case in conjunction with the general background information, the author must be at a specific and individual risk of persecution if returned to Afghanistan. The State party cites a judgement by the European Court of Human Rights in H and B v. the United Kingdom concerning an Afghan national who had been employed as interpreter for the United States forces in Afghanistan, where the Court rejected the claim that the author would not be safe in Kabul because of his profile and the security situation there. The Court found that it could not consider that the author would be in risk in Kabul solely because of his previous work as an interpreter for the United States forces but should instead examine the individual circumstances of his case, the nature of his connections and his profile. The Court concluded that the author had failed to demonstrate that his return to Afghanistan would violate article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 8 4.6 In the present case, the State party notes that the author had, neither during his interview with the Danish police nor in his asylum application, stated that he had received any concrete threats in the form of “night letters”. The author stated during his interview with the DIS that he had not mentioned this before because he had wanted to mention it during the interview with the DIS. In his hearing before the RAB, he stated that he had been afraid to write about this because the information “could have become available to unauthorized persons”. In his complaint to the Committee, the author has maintained that he forgot to include the information about the letters in the asylum application and had later contacted the Red Cross for assistance. Additionally, the State party notes that the author has provided conflicting statements regarding the nature of these letters (whether they were general or referred to him specifically), the authorship and the source of the letters. In that regard, the State party notes that the author informed the DIS that the Afghan army had delivered the letters, but later at the hearing before the RAB, the author stated that the United States army had collected the letters in the street. Additionally, the author stated, during his interview with the DIS, that the letters had been signed under the names of mullahs and found in three different provinces, but during the same interview, he said that they had been signed by Commander Baljol and that all the letters had been found in the province of Takhar. The State party concludes that the author’s statements regarding the concrete threats against him are inconsistent. The RAB had concluded that the author’s statements regarding the “night letters” were inconsistent and fabricated. 4.7 The State party argues that the author’s statements regarding the alleged “conflicts” experienced in Afghanistan before his departure were also inconsistent. In his application, the author stated that he had received several threats over the phone, as did his relatives and his father. In his interview with the DIS, the author stated that he had had a conflict with the Taliban as a result of his work as an interpreter. In his second interview with the DIS, the author stated that he had also had personal conflicts and received personal threats from the local population. However, the author never mentioned any threats from local population to the RAB. The State party concludes that, in his contact with Danish authorities, the author has continuously given inconsistent statements regarding his issues in Afghanistan. 8 . 6 Judgement of 9 March 2013 (applications Nos. 70073/10 and 44569/2011)