Message: Kesmatullah Khakdar v. the Russian Federation. Message No. 2126/2011. The Views were adopted by the Committee on October 17, 2014.
In 2011, the author was assisted in preparing a complaint. Subsequently, the complaint was communicated to the Russian Federation.
Subject matter: Possible deportation of the author to Afghanistan after being refused asylum.
Substantive issues: the use of torture; the right to protection from unlawful interference in personal and family life.
The Committee's assessment of the factual circumstances of the case. The Committee took note of the author's communication that, if returned to Afghanistan, he, as a former combatant of the pro-Soviet regime fighting the Mujahideen, is in danger of lynching by Taliban militants; that the author has lived for more than 20 years outside the State of origin, no longer has any ties there, which completely deprives him of support and exposes him to The dangers of attack; and also that the author's area of origin is reportedly increasingly outside the sphere of influence of the central Government and is in the hands of the Taliban (paragraph 11.2 of the Considerations).
The Committee notes that the materials available to it indicate that, when examining the author's allegations by the authorities of the State party, great importance was attached to the fact that he was not subject to domestic legislation governing refugee status and that it appears that the author's specific rights under the Covenant were not sufficiently taken into account (See para. Communication No. 1544/2007, Hamida v. Canada (paragraphs 8.3, 8.4 and 8.6).). The Committee notes that the State party only indicates in its communications that the author left his country of origin for economic reasons, but does not assess the existing risk of torture against him if returned to Afghanistan. With all due respect to the authority of the immigration authorities to evaluate the evidence provided to them, the Committee believes that additional analysis should be carried out in this case. In the absence of information provided by the State party indicating that a thorough assessment has been carried out of the author's claims that he may be subjected to torture if forcibly returned to Afghanistan, the Committee considers that the imposition and enforcement of a decision to deport the author would constitute a violation of article 7 of the Covenant (paragraph 11.4 of the Views).
Conclusions of the Committee. In accordance with the sub-item. (a) Article 2, paragraph 3, of the Covenant, the State party is under an obligation to provide the author with an effective remedy, including a full re-examination of the author's allegations of a threat of torture, taking into account the State party's obligations under the Covenant. The State party is also under an obligation not to expose other persons to similar risks of violation of their rights (paragraph 13 of the Views).