CAT/C/52/D/475/2011 Procurator-General of Kazakhstan. On 21 October 2011 and 21 December 2011, the Uralsk City Court extended the detention pending extradition until 24 December 2011 and 24 March 2012 respectively. The above extensions of the detention pending extradition were motivated by the Committee’s request for interim measures. According to domestic legislation, detention pending extradition may be extended up to 12 months at the request of the Procurator.5 6.3 On 22 August 2011, the complainant’s brother’s lawyer filed a request for refugee status on his behalf. On 12 October 2011, the authorities received a request for the discontinuance of the refugee status procedure from the complainant’s brother. On 10 December 2011, the Department of Internal Affairs of West Kazakhstan District received a second request for refugee status from the complainant’s brother. On 30 December 2011, his request was rejected by the Commission on the implementation of the procedure for granting, extending, withdrawing and terminating refugee status of the Directorate of Migration Police of the Department of Internal Affairs of West Kazakhstan District, based on article 12, paragraphs 4 and 5, of the refugee law adopted on 4 December 2009. Those provisions allow for the rejection of applications for refugee status from individuals who arrived from the territory of a safe third State and from individuals regarding whom there are serious grounds to assume that they have participated in the activities of terrorist, extremist or banned religious organizations in the country of arrival or in the country of origin. The complainant’s brother has the opportunity to appeal the rejection in accordance with article 8, paragraphs 1.4 and 1.5, and article 15 of the refugee law and article 280 of the Civil Procedure Code of Kazakhstan. The appeal has to be filed before the court within three months from the initial decision. The complainant’s brother’s lawyer filed an appeal on his behalf, on 15 February 2012, before Court No. 2 of Uralsk City. At the time of the State party’s submission, the appeal was under consideration. Accordingly, no final decision regarding extradition to Uzbekistan had been taken. 6.4 The State party submits that the complainant’s brother failed to exhaust the available legal remedies and therefore his communication is inadmissible. Complainant’s additional submissions 7.1 On 11 March 2012, the complainant submitted that, on 27 December 2011, his brother’s application for refugee status was rejected by the Commission on the implementation of the procedure for granting, extending, withdrawing and terminating refugee status of the Directorate of Migration Police of the Department of Internal Affairs of West Kazakhstan District and that he appealed the rejection before Court No. 2 of Uralsk City on 15 February 2012. 7.2 On 23 April 2012, the complainant submitted that, on 27 March 2012, Court No. 2 of Uralsk City rejected his brother’s appeal based on article 12, paragraphs 4 and 5, of the refugee law (see para. 6.3 above), and because the Court considered that his brother did not “correspond to the definition of a refugee”, since he had left Uzbekistan for the Russian Federation for economic reasons. On 13 April 2012, the complainant’s brother filed an appeal against that court decision before the Appellate Panel of West Kazakhstan Regional Court. At the time of the submission of 23 April 2012, no court hearing had been scheduled. 7.3 The complainant submits that the State party has not presented information regarding the effectiveness of the refugee procedure for individuals seeking asylum from persecution by the law enforcement authorities of Uzbekistan. His brother’s lawyer 5 6 The State party makes reference to art. 534, para. 1, of the Criminal Procedure Code of Kazakhstan.