CAT/C/71/D/807/2017
considered credible; the Federal Office for Migration considered that her description of her
travels in the Kurdish region was vague and stereotypical, that her handwritten accounts of
the visits were contradictory and that the clarifications she had provided about the events that
had occurred prior to her arrest cast doubt on her credibility. Moreover, according to the
Federal Office for Migration, X had failed to provide a convincing explanation and
description of the conditions of detention and interrogation methods to which she had been
subjected.
2.7
In addition, on 10 June and 17 September 2013, the Federal Office for Migration
received two anonymous letters in which the complainants were accused of giving the Swiss
authorities false identities, namely those of Ms. Ghazal Tarik and Mr. Ebrahim Tarik. It is
alleged in these letters that X has a sister in Switzerland (the daughter of Y), that X and Y
entered Switzerland on visas in order to visit her and that they then left for France and
returned to Switzerland in order to apply for asylum. 5 As the letters are anonymous, the
complainants fear that they are the work of the Iranian intelligence agencies.
2.8
On 4 September 2014, following her request for an opportunity to add to her
statements, X was again heard by the Federal Office for Migration. At this hearing, she again
struggled to recount in detail everything that had happened.
2.9
On 9 September 2014, X’s lawyer at the time filed an appeal with the Federal
Administrative Court and requested that the questions to which X had yet to reply should be
put to her. Regarding the anonymous letters, once it had received the complainants’ appeal,
the Federal Administrative Court contacted the Embassy of Switzerland in the Islamic
Republic of Iran in order to obtain the complete files of the visa applications submitted by
the persons mentioned in the letters. In a reply dated 10 December 2014, the Embassy stated
that the files for 2011 had been destroyed. The Federal Administrative Court thus contacted
the Reusser family, which, according to the letters, had hosted the complainants. The Reusser
family said that the persons mentioned in the letters had stayed with another person, Golnaz
Tarik.
2.10 After contacting Golnaz Tarik, the Federal Administrative Court noted that her mother
had the same first and last names (albeit with different spellings, which, according to the
State party, are due to simple differences in transcription) and date of birth as X’s mother and
the ex-wife of Y. In her response of 10 July 2015, Golnaz Tarik stated that she had hosted
her father and sister at her home in 2011 and had accompanied them to the airport. In addition,
the Court found that X’s responses to the questions about Ghazal Tarik provided strong
evidence that she had used this identity when introducing herself to the two persons whom
she had met in Switzerland. The complainants dispute the allegations of false identity and
offered to undergo DNA tests. However, despite a request from the Federal Administrative
Court, Golnaz Tarik refused to undergo a DNA test.
2.11 The Federal Administrative Court ultimately dismissed the appeal on 26 November
2015, finding that the account given by the complainants was neither credible nor plausible,
owing in large part to the lack of details about the torture suffered and the vague nature of
the account. X, for her part, alleges that the Federal Administrative Court did not properly
examine the anonymous letters and that these letters are not well founded. The Court also
overlooked the fact that victims of torture with post-traumatic stress disorder often struggle
to recount traumatic events, particularly in the context of a hearing and without
psychotherapy. For this reason, X considers that the Swiss authorities and courts have not
5
GE.21-12363
It is explained in the letters that a couple, Mr. and Mrs. Reusser, invited and hosted Ebrahim Tarik
and his daughter Ghazal Tarik at their home in Vevey from 24 June 2011. Ms. Reusser had apparently
introduced them as her uncle and niece. It is alleged in these letters that these two persons claimed to
have returned to the Islamic Republic of Iran but stayed in France for two days before returning to
Lutry, Switzerland, where they lived in hiding for five months with Golnaz Tarik, who, according to
the second letter, is in fact Ebrahim Tarik’s daughter. In addition, it is claimed in these letters that
Ghazal Tarik then went to the Vallorbe registration and processing centre, where she filed an asylum
application under the name X. Ebrahim Tarik allegedly went to the same centre shortly afterwards to
file his asylum application under the name Y. At their hearings on 3 and 4 September 2013, the
complainants were asked whether they knew Ebrahim Tarik or Ghazal Tarik, and they replied that
they did not.
3