CCPR/C/125/D/2238/2013 Sikh torture victims protection in Canada because they had an internal flight alternative and that “pre-removal risk assessment officers were trained to issue negative decisions”. Thus, they are neither independent nor impartial. The authors claim that the rejection of most of the new evidence presented by them because it related to what was previously alleged is an example of the latter. They further argue that the negative Federal Court decision on the stay of deportation illustrates the lack of access to an effective remedy. The authors note that the case was rejected because they were alleging the same risks as before. They claim that the Canadian judicial system does not provide “a way to correct blatant errors that could result in torture and death”. The authors submit that the situation in which the Federal Court is not taking any position on the substance of the cases but only controlling for procedural flaws does not represent an effective remedy under article 2 of the Covenant. 7.6 The authors note that many Sikh torture victims are being refused international protection in Canada and deported back to India because there is a serious misunderstanding of what constitutes an internal flight alternative. They submit that the application of an internal flight alternative should be limited to cases in which there would be state protection or a reasonable alternative for the torture victim. They claim that because they have been targeted by the power structure of the State of India and the dominant political party, they could not possibly live elsewhere in India. They state that they have a great deal of evidence of the continuing police pressure and searches to find them today. 20 The authors have family members who have previously been targeted for political activism and who have suffered torture and forced disappearance. 21They claim that there is enough evidence to suggest that their case is a high-profile case. 7.7 The authors claim that there is no internal flight alternative available to them, given that it is generally held in refugee law that those who are targeted by state agents do not have a realistic possibility of an internal flight alternative. They add that there is no possibility of an internal relocation in India for people in their situation. 22 7.8 The authors claim that there are serious and systematic problems with Canadian procedures for analysis of risk of return that are currently resulting in massive violations of international law. They argue that the pre-removal risk assessment decisions regarding their case were adopted without taking into account the context of human rights abuses against Sikhs and the culture of impunity in the Punjab police. Issues and proceedings before the Committee Consideration of admissibility 8.1 Before considering any claims contained in a communication, the Committee must decide, in accordance with rule 93 of its rules of procedure, whether it is admissible under the Optional Protocol. 8.2 The Committee has ascertained, as required under article 5 (2) (a) of the Optional Protocol, that the same matter is not being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement. 8.3 The Committee takes note of the authors’ claim that they have exhausted all effective domestic remedies available to them. In the absence of any objection by the State party in this connection, the Committee considers that the requirements of article 5 (2) (b) of the Optional Protocol have been met. 8.4 The Committee notes the authors’ claims that, in case of return to India, their rights under articles 6 and 7 of the Covenant would be violated. It notes, however, that after a thorough examination, the Refugee Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada denied the asylum application of the authors because: (a) there was an available and reasonable internal flight alternative, given that the problems of the authors were local in nature and confined to their home state of Punjab; (b) they had not established that they 20 21 22 8 The authors do not provide any supporting documentation in this regard. Ibid. The authors provide a series of news articles about the police identifying newcomers in various cities in India.