CCPR/C/127/D/2728/2016 by the author, it considers that the author has not demonstrated clear arbitrariness or error in the domestic authorities’ assessment as to whether he faced a real, personal and reasonably foreseeable risk of a threat to his right to life as a result of violent acts resulting from overcrowding or private land disputes in Kiribati. 9.8 The Committee also notes the author’s claims before the domestic authorities that he would be seriously harmed by the lack of access to potable water on Tarawa, as fresh water lenses had been depleted due to saltwater contamination produced by sea level rise. In that regard, the Committee notes that according to the report and testimony of the climate change researcher John Corcoran, 60 per cent of the residents of South Tarawa obtained fresh water from rationed supplies provided by the public utilities board. The Committee notes the findings of the domestic authorities that there was no evidence that the author would lack access to potable water in Kiribati. While recognizing the hardship that may be caused by water rationing, the Committee notes that the author has not provided sufficient information indicating that the supply of fresh water is inaccessible, insufficient or unsafe so as to produce a reasonably foreseeable threat of a health risk that would impair his right to enjoy a life with dignity or cause his unnatural or premature death. 9.9 The Committee further notes the author’s claim before the domestic authorities that his right to life had been violated because he had been deprived of his means of subsistence, as his crops had been destroyed due to salt deposits on the ground. The Committee observes the finding of the domestic authorities that, while the author stated that it was difficult to grow crops, it was not impossible. The Committee recognizes that in certain places, the lack of alternatives to subsistence livelihoods may place individuals at a heightened risk of vulnerability to the adverse effects of climate change. However, the Committee notes the lack of information provided by the author on alternative sources of employment and on the availability of financial assistance to meet basic humanitarian needs in Kiribati. The Committee further notes the Tribunal’s observation that most nutritious crops remained available in Kiribati. The information made available to the Committee does not indicate that when the author’s removal occurred, there was a real and reasonably foreseeable risk that he would be exposed to a situation of indigence, deprivation of food and extreme precarity that could threaten his right to life, including his right to a life with dignity. The Committee therefore considers that the author has not established that the assessment of the domestic authorities was clearly arbitrary or erroneous in that regard, or amounted to a denial of justice. 9.10 The Committee notes the author’s assertion that he faces a risk to his right to life because of overpopulation and frequent and increasingly intense flooding and breaches of sea walls. The Committee also notes the author’s argument that the State party’s courts erred in determining the time frame within which serious harm to the author would occur in Kiribati, and did not give sufficient weight to the expert testimony of the climate change researcher. The Committee notes that in his comments submitted in 2016, the author asserted that Kiribati would become uninhabitable within 10 to 15 years. 9.11 The Committee takes note of the observation of the Immigration and Protection Tribunal that climate change-induced harm can occur through sudden onset events and slow onset processes. Reports indicate that sudden onset events are discrete occurrences that have an immediate and obvious impact over a period of hours or days, while slow-onset processes may have a gradual, adverse impact on livelihoods and resources over a period of months or years. Both sudden-onset events, such as intense storms and flooding, and slowonset processes, such as sea level rise, salinization and land degradation, can propel crossborder movement of individuals seeking protection from climate change-related harm. 26 The Committee is of the view that without robust national and international efforts, the effects of climate change in receiving States may expose individuals to a violation of their rights under articles 6 or 7 of the Covenant, thereby triggering the non-refoulement obligations of sending States. Furthermore, given that the risk of an entire country becoming submerged under water is such an extreme risk, the conditions of life in such a country may become incompatible with the right to life with dignity before the risk is realized. 9.12 In the present case, the Committee accepts the author’s claim that sea level rise is likely to render Kiribati uninhabitable. However, it notes that the time frame of 10 to 15 26 Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration, para. 18 (h), (i) and (l). 11