CCPR/C/117/D/2493/2014 managed to escape, as he had slept in one of the rooms in the house, and his friend and the Al-Shabaab representative had slept in the other room. The Al-Shabaab representative had come to the house of the author’s friend sometime between noon and 1 p.m. He had kept an eye on the author for the rest of the day and throughout the night. In this regard, the State party notes that only at the hearing before the Refugee Appeals Board did the author state that he had been locked in a storage room and the representative of Al-Shabaab had gone to sleep by the entrance to it in order to prevent the author from escaping. At the Refugee Appeals Board hearing, the author also stated for the first time that he had managed to escape by jumping out of a window in the room that he had been put in. The Al-Shabaab representative did not know that the room had a window, as he was unfamiliar with the house. Finally, the author stated at the Board hearing, contrary to his statement at the asylum screening interview, that the Al-Shabaab representative had arrived at the house when it was dark outside, and not at 1 p.m. as claimed earlier. 4.8 In its decision, the Refugee Appeals Board considered it to be a fact that the author had had no conflicts with the Habar Gidir clan himself, nor any other problems resulting from his clan affiliation. In this regard, the State party notes that at the “substantive asylum interview”, held on 23 April 2014, the author was asked whether he was wanted by anyone solely because he belonged to the Ashraf clan, to which he replied that he was not but it would not be possible for him to obtain protection from his clan. The author also stated that the reason for his problems with the Habar Gidir clan was that it had taken part of his family’s land 17 or 18 years ago. In addition, he stated that his sister had been forced into marriage and that his family had had to pay money to be left in peace. His family had last been charged money before Al-Shabaab took control of the town, five or six years earlier. He stated that he had had no other problems with the Habar Gidir clan. Accordingly, the State party submits that the Refugee Appeals Board could not accept the author’s statements as fact, including the assertion that he would be persecuted by Al-Shabaab or would suffer ongoing conflicts in his home region on account of his clan affiliation. 4.9 As regards the author’s statement before the Committee that he was imprisoned for one year due to his affiliation with the Ashraf clan, the State party observes that this statement was already taken into account in the assessment of the matter made by the Refugee Appeals Board on 6 August 2014. The Board found that, when viewed in isolation, this circumstance did not form a basis for asylum either. According to his own statement, the author’s conflict, which took place in Boosaaso in the Bari region, must be considered to have ended, as he was released in December 2013 with assistance from the council of elders, against payment of an amount unknown to the author. Thus, the allegation that his imprisonment was due to his clan affiliation is based solely on the author’s own assumption. The State party also observes that the Bari region is located far from the author’s home town of Qoryooley. The fact that the author belongs to a minority clan cannot lead to a different assessment of the matter, as this cannot independently form the basis for asylum. The State party reiterates that the Refugee Appeals Board considered it to be a fact that the author had no clan-related conflicts himself and that he appeared to be a “very low-profile individual”. 4.10 The author also submitted that the physical and mental consequences for him resulting from the killing of his father and brother and from his own imprisonment were not taken into account during the asylum proceedings. The State party notes that if an asylum seeker’s statements in support of his case are characterized by inconsistencies, changing statements, expansions or omissions, the Refugee Appeals Board will attempt to clarify the reasons. When assessing the credibility of an asylum seeker, the Refugee Appeals Board will take into account the asylum seeker’s particular situation, such as cultural differences, age and health. However, inconsistent statements made by the asylum seeker about crucial elements of his grounds for seeking asylum may weaken his credibility. If in doubt about the asylum seeker’s credibility, the Board will always assess to what extent the principle of 6