CCPR/C/106/D/1912/2009 a PRRA officer using the same reasoning. It therefore led to the same conclusion as the PRRA. 3.7 As for the second PRRA application procedure, the assessment made by the officer who was the same as in the first procedure is essentially cut and paste from the first decision despite the new developments in Sri Lanka and the voluminous new evidence submitted. While acknowledging that the Sri Lankan authorities maintain checkpoints to try to intercept LTTE sympathizers, and human rights abuses such as arbitrary arrest and detention, torture and discrimination against Tamils especially from the East and North continue to occur, the PRRA officer concluded that the author who is a Tamil would not face such treatment. The author therefore considers that the PRRA assessment was biased and unfair. State party’s observations on admissibility and merits 4.1 In its submission on the admissibility and merits of the communication transmitted on 4 May 2010, the State party notes that the author based his communication on precisely the same story, evidence and facts that a competent domestic tribunal and expert risk assessment officer have determined not to be credible, and not supporting a finding of a substantial personal risk of torture or cruel or inhuman treatment in the future. 4.2 The State party contends that the author’s allegations with respect to articles 6, paragraph 1, and 7 are inadmissible on the ground of non-exhaustion of domestic remedies since the author has submitted to the Committee two pieces of evidence (a medical report and a letter from Amnesty International) that could have been submitted to domestic authorities. The documents could still be the basis of renewed PRRA or H&C applications. The author has also failed to exhaust domestic remedies by not applying for judicial review of the negative decision in his first H&C application. In the alternative, the author’s communication with respect to article 6, paragraph 1, and 7 should be declared inadmissible pursuant to article 2 of the Optional Protocol on the grounds of non-substantiation. The author’s assertions are not credible and there is no objective evidence to support a finding that the author is at personal risk if he returns to Sri Lanka. 4.3 As for the author’s allegations in relation to article 9 of the Covenant, the State party submits that they are incompatible with the provisions of the Covenant pursuant to article 3 of the Optional Protocol or, in the alternative, that they are inadmissible on the ground of non-substantiation under article 2 of the Protocol. The State party is of the view that article 9 of the Covenant has no extraterritorial application and does not prohibit a State from deporting a foreign national to a country where he alleges he faces a risk of arbitrary arrest or detention. In the event that the Committee would declare part or all of the allegations admissible, the State party requests that the Committee finds them without merits. 4.4 The State party observes that in support of his refugee claim dated 5 December 2002, the author alleged that between 1983 and 2002 when he left Sri Lanka, he was targeted by the LTTE for support and for money. In turn, the Sri Lankan security forces suspected him of being a member of the LTTE and detained, interrogated, beat and harassed him. His troubles allegedly began in 1983 when he was arrested by the police in Colombo and was ill-treated during his questioning. In 1987, his father was killed in crossfire in a fight between the LTTE and the army. When the author went to claim the dead body, the army arrested and beat him, and detained him for six days. In June 1990, the LTTE approached him for his support, and when he refused, forced him to dig bunkers. In August 1991, the LTTE demanded money from him. In March 1994, he was allegedly arrested by the army, hit by a gun butt and kicked, and had his gold chain, ring, watch and money taken from him. In July 1997, he was allegedly arrested in a round-up, and was interrogated for nine days, and not given adequate food and water. He was rounded up again by the army in November 1998 and insulted. 6