Communication on deportation to Afghanistan found inadmissible for failures to exhaust domestic remedies and to substantiate claims

Facts

The author is an Afghani national who claims that his deportation from Sweden to Afghanistan would violate his rights under articles 7 and 17 of the Covenant. The author claims he would face a real and personal risk of persecution based on his sexual orientation and conversion to Christianity. The State party found that the author failed to show that he faced a real and personal risk upon his return to Afghanistan. 

Admissibility

The Committee found the author’s claims inadmissible under articles 2 and 5 (2) (b) of the Optional Protocol. First, it held that the author had failed to exhaust domestic remedies in relation to his claim under article 17, as he had not made any attempt to raise this claim before domestic authorities. Second, the Committee found that the author failed to show that the decision of the domestic authorities were clearly arbitrary, or amounted to a manifest error or denial of justice.

 

xxx