View Adopted: 2019.07.26
The Committee considers that the author has not sufficiently substantiated in what way the investigations undertaken should have caused irreparable damage to his honour and reputation within the Kurdish Canadian community. Consequently, this part of the communication is declared inadmissible for lack of substantiation, pursuant to article 2 of the Optional Protocol.
In relation to articles 19(2) and 22, the Committee considers that the author has failed to sufficiently substantiate that he would have been prohibited by the State party to express his political opinions, or would have faced any illegitimate consequences of such expression or association. Accordingly, this part of the communication is declared inadmissible, pursuant to article 2 of the Optional Protocol.
As regards article 26, the Committee considers that it has not been sufficiently substantiated that the author’s differential treatment based on residence status was not objective, reasonable and in pursuit of a legitimate aim. Consequently, these claims are inadmissible under article 2 of the Optional Protocol.