Complainant’s response On 5 February 2007, the complainant forwarded the Committee a copy of the results of his risk assessment, in which his request was denied and he was asked to leave the State party. No further information was provided. Committee’s decision The Committee considers the dialogue ongoing. Case Dadar, 258/2004 Nationality and country of removal if applicable Iranian to Iran Views adopted on 3 November 2005 Issues and violations found Removal - article 3 Interim measures granted and State party response Yes and State party acceded Remedy recommended The Committee urges the State party, in accordance with rule 112, paragraph 5, of its rules of procedure, to inform it, within 90 days of the date of the transmittal of this decision, of the steps taken in response to the decision expressed above. Due date for State party response 26 February 2006 Date of reply Latest reply 10 October 2007 (had previously responded on 22 March 2006 and 24 April 2006 - see annual report A/61/44 and 9 August 2006 and 5 April 2007 - see annual report A/62/44). State party response The Committee will recall that the State party removed the complainant to Iran on 26 March 2006 despite a finding of a violation of the Convention. In its response of 24 April 2006, it stated that since his return a Canadian representative had spoken with the complainant’s nephew who said that Mr. Dadar had arrived in Tehran without incident, and was staying with his family. The State party had no direct contact with him since he was returned to Iran. In light of this information, as well as Canada’s 114