CAT/C/32/D/182/2001
Page 4
Pettah police station from 31 January to 22 February 1996 and his departure from Sri
Lanka on 22 August 1997; and (c) the absence of a sufficiently substantiated risk of
torture upon return to Sri Lanka, where the complainant would be able to resettle in
areas not affected by the hostilities between the parties to the conflict.
2.7
On 30 November 1998, the complainant lodged an appeal with the Swiss
Asylum Review Commission (ARK) and subsequently submitted two medical reports,
dated 6 January and 5 September 1999, confirming that he suffers from post-traumatic
stress disorder. By submission of 10 October 1999, the BFF maintained its position,
arguing that the complainant could receive adequate therapeutic treatment at the
Family Rehabilitation Centre in Colombo or at one of its 12 branch offices in Sri
Lanka. Moreover, it noted a contradiction between the medical report of 6 January
1999, which referred to the complainant having been detained for 14 days in Colombo
prior to his arrest on 31 January 1996, and the complainant’s failure to raise this point
during the interviews.
2.8
On 30 November 2000, the ARK dismissed the complainant’s appeal. It
endorsed the findings of the BFF and added the following grounds: (a) that none of
the complainant’s alleged arrests resulted in criminal proceedings against him, for
collaboration with the LTTE; (b) that the fact that the complainant was twice detained
in Colombo was irrelevant for his asylum application; (c) that, even if the complainant
suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder, he had failed to substantiate that this was
the result of persecution by the Sri Lankan authorities; (d) that the complainant had
failed to submit reliable documents to prove his identity; and (e) that the
complainant’s deportation to Sri Lanka would not constitute an unreasonable
hardship, in the absence of sufficient grounds for believing that he would be subjected
to torture, and given that his family continued to live in the northern Province
(Tellipalai) and that adequate treatment for his post-traumatic stress disorder would be
available in Sri Lanka.
2.9
The BFF thereafter set a new deadline for the complainant to leave
Switzerland by 5 February 2001.
The complaint:
3.1
The complainant claims that his forcible return to Sri Lanka would constitute a
violation by Switzerland of article 3 of the Convention, since there are substantial
grounds for believing that, as a young Tamil who was repeatedly arrested and
interrogated by the authorities and militia groups, and whose brother was known to be
an LTTE member, he would be subjected to torture upon return to Sri Lanka.
3.2
He submits that the Sri Lankan security forces carry out daily raids and street
inspections against Tamils, who can be arrested for up to 18 months, under the
Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) without an arrest warrant and without being
informed of the charges against them. Under the Emergency Regulations (ER)
supplementing the PTA, this period may repeatedly be prolonged for 90 days by a
judicial commission whose decisions are not subject to appeal. During this time,
detainees are frequently interrogated about their contacts with the LTTE, and are often
subjected to torture, ill-treatment or even extra-judicial execution.