CCPR/C/112/D/2341/2014 Annex Decision of the Human Rights Committee under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights (112th session) concerning Communication No. 2341/2014* Submitted by: N.U. (not represented by counsel) Alleged victim: The author State party: Norway Date of communication: 15 May 2013 (initial submission) The Human Rights Committee, established under article 28 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Meeting on 28 October 2014, Adopts the following: Decision on admissibility 1.1 The author of the communication is Mr. N.U., a stateless person,1 born in Myanmar in 1976. His request for asylum in Norway was rejected and he faces deportation to Myanmar. He claims that, if Norway proceeds with his deportation, it will violate his rights under article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Optional Protocol entered into force for the State party on 23 March 1976. The author is unrepresented. 1.2 On 5 February 2014, the Committee, acting through its Special Rapporteur on new communications and interim measures, requested the State party to refrain from deporting the author to Myanmar while his case was under consideration by the Committee. 1.3 On 19 May 2014, the Special Rapporteur on new communications and interim measures, acting on behalf of the Committee, decided that the admissibility of the communication should be examined separately from its merits. * The following members of the Committee participated in the examination of the present 1 2 communication: Yadh Ben Achour, Lazhari Bouzid, Christine Chanet, Ahmad Amin Fathalla, Cornelis Flinterman, Walter Kälin, Yuji Iwasawa, Zonke Zanele Majodina, Gerald L. Neuman, Sir Nigel Rodley, Víctor Manuel Rodríguez-Rescia, Fabián Omar Salvioli, Anja Seibert-Fohr, Dheerujlall Seetulsingh, Yuval Shany, Konstantine Varzelashvili, Margo Waterval and Andrei Paul Zlătescu. According to a copy of the author’s refugee card, he is a national of Myanmar. However, the authenticity of that document was challenged by the Norwegian authorities.