CCPR/C/120/D/2601/2015 submitting that several members of his family have received threatening letters from Shia militants. 19 He also refers to the dangerous and critical situation of Sunnis in Iraq, emphasizing reports of UNHCR20 and Human Rights Watch.21 7.2 The author counters the State party’s description of the Danish asylum system, stating that the Board consisted of only three members when it dealt with his case: the chair, an attorney and a member appointed by the Ministry of Justice. 22 7.3 The author notes that final written reports of asylum interviews are prepared by translators and that no system is in place to prevent factual or other mistakes. The author reiterates that audio recordings of the interviews are not available and that there are no education requirements for translators. The author notes that these reports, of questionable quality, are decisive in the final decisions made by the Board. In conclusion, the author recalls that under no circumstances would he return to Baghdad, as his life would be “directly” in danger in Iraq. Issues and proceedings before the Committee Consideration of admissibility 8.1 Before considering any claim contained in a communication, the Committee must decide, in accordance with rule 93 of its rules of procedure, whether the communication 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 notes that the State party has not objected to the admissibility of the communication under article 5 (2) (b) of the Optional Protocol. It also observes that the author filed an application for asylum, which was last rejected by the Refugee Appeals Board on 23 October 2015. Since the decisions of the Board cannot be appealed, no further remedies are available to the author. Accordingly, the Committee considers that domestic remedies have been exhausted. 8.4 The Committee further notes that the author did not provide any substantiation regarding his allegation that the Board’s assessment of his application for asylum would have amounted to a denial of justice in his case, in violation of article 13, read in conjunction with articles 6 and 7, of the Covenant. The Committee therefore considers that this part of the communication is inadmissible under article 2 of the Optional Protocol. Since the author has withdrawn his allegations of a violation of article 14 of the Covenant in connection with the hearing of his case by the Danish asylum authorities, the Committee will not examine these claims. 8.5 With regard to the author’s claims under articles 6 and 7 of the Covenant, the Committee notes the State party’s argument that they should be held inadmissible for lack of substantiation. However, the Committee considers that, for the purpose of admissibility, the author has adequately explained the reasons for which he fears that his forcible return to Iraq would incur the risk of treatment contrary to articles 6 and 7 of the Covenant. In the absence of any other obstacles to admissibility, the Committee declares the communication admissible insofar as it appears to raise issues under articles 6 and 7 of the Covenant, and proceeds to its consideration of the merits. 19 20 21 22 10 In the letters, the family was reportedly told to leave their house immediately or suffer the consequences, and they fled to Turkey soon after. The two older sisters remaining in Baghdad reportedly prepared to escape to Turkey as soon as possible. The author does not elaborate further. “UNHCR position on returns to Iraq”, 14 November 2016. Human Rights Watch, “Iraq: executions by Government-backed militia”, 18 December 2016. The author submits that since 1 January 2017, asylum cases are heard again by only three members of the Board: the chair or a deputy chair, an attorney and a member appointed by the Ministry of Immigration and Integration.