CCPR/C/114/D/2426/2014 Committee of the Red Cross had facilitated the return of former Iranian refugees of Kurdish origin from northern Iraq to the Islamic Republic of Iran.4 The State party adds that several former active opponents of the Iranian regime, including members of the Mujaheddin e Khalq organization had returned voluntarily and in an organized manner to the Islamic Republic of Iran. The State party cites analyst Ziryan Roj Helaty, according to whom refugees from Al-Tash camp with no political affiliation would be able to return to the Islamic Republic of Iran.5 The State party notes that there is no available information indicating that Iranian nationals from Al-Tash camp or Barika camp would be subjected to abuse by Iranian authorities upon return to that country. According to the aforementioned background information, it has been possible even for formerly active opponents to the Iranian regime to return to the country without risking persecution or abuse. 4.9 Based on an overall assessment of the background information available and the information submitted by the author, the State party concludes there is no basis to suggest that his birth and childhood spent at the Al-Tash refugee camp in Iraq and his subsequent stay at the Barika camp would, by themselves, signify that, if returned to the Islamic Republic of Iran, the author would be at a particular risk of being subjected to treatment contrary to article 7 of the Covenant because the Iranian intelligence service would use him as an informer. This applies even if the author may become an object of general interest to the Iranian authorities in the event of his return. 4.10 The State party notes that the author has not been politically active even to a modest extent. In the light of his limited activities (participating in folk dances and meetings), he has not been profiled as a politically active person. As regards the political activities of the author’s father and brother, the State party observes that these occurred a long time ago, and ceased in 1979, when the current Iranian regime assumed power. Therefore, these activities were allegedly targeted under the former Shah’s regime, which was later brought down. 4.11 The State party concludes, in line with the Refugee Appeals Board, that the author has failed to prove the likelihood of his claim that his father and brother’s activities in the Islamic Republic of Iran or the family’s combined activities have been of such a nature and intensity that the author would be at risk of being subjected to treatment falling under article 7 of the Covenant. The State party therefore submits that the author’s return to the Islamic Republic of Iran will not constitute a violation of article 7. 4.12 The State party notes that, on 16 June 2014, the Refugee Appeals Board suspended the time limit for the author’s departure from Denmark until further notice, in compliance with the Committee’s request. Considering that the author has failed to prove the likelihood that, if returned to the Islamic Republic of Iran, he will be at risk of suffering irreparable damage, the State party requests that the Committee’s request for interim measures be lifted. Author’s comments on the State party’s observations 5.1 On 17 January 2015, the author submitted his comments on the State party’s observations. The author insists that his family has been recognized by UNHCR as refugees and that the relevant certificate was renewed in 2011, which means that UNHCR does not 4 5 6 This information was contained in the report entitled “Iran: on conversion to Christianity, issues concerning Kurds and post-2009 election protestors as well as legal issues and exit procedures”, published by the Danish Immigration Service, Landinfo and the Danish Refugee Council in February 2013. Ibid.