CCPR/C/128/D/3032/2017 written evidence about his active Christian life in Sweden. While he was born into a Christian family, he did not initially have in-depth knowledge, and his faith was that of a child. However, the fact that his faith has evolved in Sweden and that his active Christian life exposes him to a risk of being perceived as an apostate has never been assessed by the migration authorities. Moreover, while his religious congregation was willing to testify for him, the migration authorities have not granted such an opportunity. 5.4 The author argues that the requirement to invoke new circumstances under chapter 12 of the Aliens Act is problematic, as it is often interpreted in a way that the circumstances cannot be related to the original asylum grounds. The migration authorities seem to interpret new circumstances as new grounds, thereby preventing asylum applicants from having their new claims assessed. The State party has been criticized for this practice, to no avail. In this regard, the author claims that his three years of active participation in church activities and religious practice were considered as a mere modification of his original asylum ground and thus were disregarded. 5.5 As concerns his assertion in his asylum application that he was a convert, the author contends that the person who was his counsel at that time submitted such a claim without his knowledge. He further claims that regardless of whether he is a convert or was born Christian, he would face a risk of persecution if returned to Afghanistan. In addition, he points out that the interpreters have noticed that both he and his brother have Christian names. He also asserts that the migration authorities acted arbitrarily when finding that no one could have lived as a Christian in Ghazni, although the Migration Agency has previously granted refugee status to other nationals of Afghanistan from this district on the basis of their Christian faith. Regarding the State party’s statement that his conversion is unknown to the Afghan authorities, the author claims that the Swedish authorities should not request evidence as to whether the Afghan authorities are aware of his conversion or demand that he hide his religion in Afghanistan. 5.6 Regarding the “Christianity tests” conducted by the Swedish authorities, the author cites criticisms expressed by some Swedish lawyers and churches, which found the tests irrelevant and far too complicated and considered the migration authorities to be religiously illiterate. Furthermore, he claims that the authorities ignored the fact that he had created, as a self-defence mechanism, a certain emotional distance to his accounts about his parents, since it is a traumatic memory for him. He submits that his religion is deeply connected to his love and longing for his parents. He feels that he lost them because they were Christian and that his religion is all that he has left of them. He contends that the authorities failed to take into account this emotional and psychological aspect when assessing his asylum claim. Regarding the negative credibility finding based on his claim of having gained knowledge about Christianity by watching a film in the Islamic Republic of Iran, the author contends that there are many ethnic and religious minorities in that country and that the country’s regime does not have any issue with Christianity. Lastly, the author states that during one of his asylum interviews, he hardly understood the interpreter who spoke a dialect different from his own. 5.7 The author submits that having a strong social network, a support system and cultural competence is crucial in Afghanistan, but he does not have any family or relatives. He has an accent from which Afghans can tell that he has lived abroad, and his nonparticipation in Muslim traditions will eventually reveal his Christianity. In addition, the human rights situation in his hometown, Ghazni, has deteriorated, as the Taliban control many parts of the city. The author considers that the State party is naive to believe the statement made by the Taliban, in which the group claims that ethnic Hazaras are their brothers. In view of the foregoing, the author claims that he would face a serious risk of persecution upon return. Issues and proceedings before the Committee Consideration of admissibility 6.1 Before considering any claim contained in a communication, the Committee must decide, in accordance with rule 97 of its rules of procedure, whether it is admissible under the Optional Protocol. 7