Page 3
On 5 June 2002 the Committee transmitted the complaint to the State party. On 7
March 2003, pursuant to rule 108, paragraph 1, of the Committee’s rules of procedure, and
following a belated request by counsel on 7 February 2003, the State party was requested
not to expel the complainant to Algeria, pending consideration of his case by the
Facts as submitted by the complainant
The complainant served in the Algerian army between approximately 1991 and
1998, where he served as a corporal in a weapons store. He claims that in 1994, he was
contacted by representatives of the Groupe Islamic Algérien (GIA), who asked him to work
for them. He refused. In 1994, for reasons not specified, he was sent to a military prison.
There is no indication as to whether the complainant was tried or convicted, or of precisely
when he was released from prison.
The complainant claims that in 1996, the authorities learned of the GIA’s
previous contact with him, and that in 1998 he was again arrested and sent to prison, on
suspicion of having supplied the GIA with weapons, ammunition and food. He was
allegedly interrogated and tortured by the Algerian security forces, and, unable to bear the
torture, admitted to having worked for the GIA. He claims, amongst other things, that he
was kicked forcefully in the genitals, that electric shocks were applied to his genitals,
shoulders, hands and feet, and that he was threatened with reprisals against his mother if he
did not cooperate. He contends that his physical condition became so critical that he had to
be transferred to a military hospital, from which he managed to escape. As he was still a
member of the armed forces at the time of his escape, this made him a deserter.
The complainant arrived in Denmark in 1999, and applied for asylum with the
Danish Immigration Service (DIS) on 28 December 1999. His application was rejected on
2 March 2001, and on 21 August 2001, the Refugee Review Board (Review Board) upheld
the DIS’s decision. The Review Board found that the complainant’s testimony about his
reasons for seeking asylum was unreliable, and that there were discrepancies in his account
of events. It found insufficient evidence to establish that the complainant had been tortured
in Algeria. The Review Board noted a report prepared by Amnesty International, which
found no signs of mental trauma, although marks on the complainant’s body were
consistent with some of the types of torture described. The Review Board concluded that
the evidence did not justify a decision to grant him asylum.
The Complainant subsequently underwent a psychological examination, which
concluded that he suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder and displayed the signs of
dissociation often seen in a person who had been subjected to torture. The report noted that
the complainant would cease participating in conversation when emotional topics were
raised, and that he experienced flashbacks. It noted that the complainant was not able to
concentrate on certain questions, because of his fear of being tortured again, and that he
found it difficult being questioned by men, as his torturers had been men. The report also


By letter dater dated 21 November 2002, the complainant’s initial counsel advised that he no longer
represented him. The complainant’s present counsel issued an appearance by letter dated 26 November 2002,
and provided further details of the complainant’s allegations. New Counsel is properly authorized.

Select target paragraph3