CCPR/C/114/D/2426/2014 consider that the need for protection has ceased. The author further insists that his family is considered to be politically active and at risk of persecution. 5.2 The author notes that, according to the same reports invoked by the State party, the now closed Al-Tash camp in Iraq was known to have been under the control of PDKI and, hence, Iranian authorities view refugees from those camps as “ex-affiliates” of PDKI. It would be difficult for Kurds from those camps to be repatriated to the Islamic Republic of Iran, especially if they have a family member who was a Kurdish activist at some point. The author notes that the State party cited passages in the reports that referred to former MKO members and other refugees in northern Iraq, who have a different history and political views than those of Al-Tash camp refugees. All sources agree that Al-Tash camp refugees would be of interest to Iranian authorities. 5.3 The author challenges the State party’s statement that his family was not politically active after arriving in Iraq in 1979. He notes that all refugees in the Al-Tash camp supported PDKI, although his father and brother were no longer engaged at the level that they had been while in the Islamic Republic of Iran. 5.4 The author adds that the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran is known to use torture in connection with imprisonment. 5.5 The author concludes that he has sufficiently substantiated his risk of being subjected to torture or ill-treatment if returned to the Islamic Republic of Iran, and he requests that interim measures be maintained. Issues and proceedings before the Committee Consideration of admissibility 6.1 Before considering any claims contained in a communication, the Committee must decide, in accordance with rule 93 of its rules of procedure, whether the communication is admissible under the Optional Protocol to the Covenant. 6.2 The Committee notes, as required by article 5 2 (a) of the Optional Protocol, that the same matter is not being examined under another international procedure of international investigation or settlement. 6.3 The Committee further notes the author’s statement that decisions by the Refugee Appeals Board of Denmark are not subject to appeal and that therefore domestic remedies have been exhausted. This has not been challenged by the State party. Therefore, the Committee considers that domestic remedies have been exhausted as required by article 5 2 (b) of the Optional Protocol. 6.4 The Committee notes the author’s allegation that his return to the Islamic Republic of Iran would put him at risk of being subjected to torture. The author bases this allegation on the fact that he was born and raised in Al-Tash refugee camp in Iraq, which he claims to be connected to PDKI; on his participation in PDKI meetings and cultural events; and on his family’s past engagement with the party. 6.5 The Committee notes that the Refugee Appeals Board thoroughly examined the author’s claim and considered his personal and family circumstances, as well as the general situation of Iranian Kurdish refugees in Iraq, including those from the Al-Tash refugee camp, and their return to the Islamic Republic of Iran, and concluded that the author’s personal background and activities did not constitute a risk of persecution and that his family’s political activities had ceased in 1979. The Board further concluded that the author had provided divergent statements regarding his family’s activities after 1979, which had undermined his credibility on that issue. On the basis of all of the above, the Board concluded that it would be unlikely that the author would be at an actual and personal risk of persecution by Iranian authorities if returned to the Islamic Republic of Iran. 7