CCPR/C/121/D/2471/2014 of the Optional Protocol does not preclude it from considering the remaining claims on the merits. 8.8 The Committee finds that the remaining allegations made by the author, concerning torture in prison and the observance of fair trial guarantees in capital cases, raise substantive issues under articles 6 and 7 of the Covenant and proceeds with its consideration of the merits. Consideration of the merits 9.1 The Committee has considered the communication in the light of all the information submitted to it by the parties, in accordance with article 5 (1) of the Optional Protocol. 9.2 The Committee notes the author’s claim that, as a murder suspect, he risks torture and execution if expelled to the Islamic Republic of Iran. The Committee recalls its general comment No. 31 (2004) on the nature of the general legal obligation imposed on States parties to the Covenant, in which it refers to the obligation of States parties not to extradite, deport, expel or otherwise remove a person from their territory, where there are substantial grounds for believing that there is a real risk of irreparable harm, such as that contemplated by articles 6 and 7 of the Covenant (para. 12). The Committee also recalls that, generally speaking, it is for the organs of States parties to the Covenant to review or evaluate facts and evidence in order to determine whether such a risk exists. 9.3 The Committee notes that the State party acknowledged that the Iranian authorities presented sufficient information to support the charges of murder against the author and that they rejected his applications for asylum and for subsidiary protection, partly because he was accused of having committed a grave crime of a non-political nature prior to arriving to Belarus, meaning that international protection cannot be granted under the provisions of domestic law. The Committee notes, however, that, when considering the author’s initial asylum application in 2014, the domestic authorities acknowledged that murder was one of a number of offences punishable by the death penalty in the Islamic Republic of Iran, that the defence mechanism is practically non-existent and that torture is used in Iranian prisons only in cases involving national security-related crimes. The domestic authorities did not consider, however, the possibility that the author’s case would be regarded in the Islamic Republic of Iran as national security-related, given the interest shown by the authorities in the revolutionary activities of the author’s brother, and that the author may, as a result, face the risk of torture. 9.4 The Committee further notes the 2017 report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, in which the Special Rapporteur mentions the lack of independence of lawyers, in particular in capital cases. 6 In the light of the information casting serious doubts on the independence and quality of legal defence available to criminal defendants and relating to the possible use of torture in capital cases in the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Committee considers that the State party has not taken adequate steps to ensure that the author would not face a real risk of arbitrary execution in the Islamic Republic of Iran. In this light, the Committee concludes that, by expelling the author to the Islamic Republic of Iran, the State party would be in violation of article 6 of the Covenant. 9.5 The Committee notes that article 7 of the Covenant and the principle of nonrefoulement arising therefrom are absolute in nature and that no one should be excluded from its protection, even if that person poses a risk to national security. In view of the information before it, in particular the reports referred to by the author, and the recent reports by the United Nations bodies,7 the Committee finds that there seems to be continued 6 7 See A/HRC/34/65, para. 45, in which the Special Rapporteur states that she is concerned that individuals accused of national security, capital, political or press crimes and those accused of offences that incur life sentences are required to select their counsel from an official pool of lawyers chosen by the head of the judiciary during the investigative phase of the trial. See A/HRC/34/65, para. 26, in which the Special Rapporteur states that, since her appointment, she has received numerous reports about the use of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. These include amputations, blinding and flogging as forms of punishment, 7