CAT/C/21/D/100/1997
page 4
Other grounds for CRA's rejection of his appeal and his request for revision
were that the author's allegations, in particular concerning the reasons for
his departure from his country of origin, were not sufficiently plausible and
that the author's fear that he would be persecuted by the Nigerian authorities
for his political activities in exile were unfounded.
4.3
Following ODR's decision to reject the application for asylum,
particularly on the ground that the allegations that he was wanted by the
police were based on two forged arrest warrants, criminal proceedings were
brought by the authorities of the canton of St. Gallen for falsification of
documents, resulting in the author's acquittal. In its acquittal decision,
the court deemed that the non-authentic nature of the documents had not been
proved. The court stated that, for the purposes of rendering a decision, it
lacked material for a comparison, and considered that ODR had failed to
satisfy the requirements of criminal law by not consulting an independent
expert.
4.4
The State party argues that the requirements regarding proof differ,
depending on whether proceedings are criminal or administrative, and that the
criminal decision of the district court by no means constituted a finding that
the documents in question were authentic. The decision was substantiated only
briefly. It was entirely unclear on what basis the court differed from ODR's
findings regarding the ample proof of falsification. The procedure followed
by ODR in the case in point was altogether normal and compatible with law,
jurisprudence and practice. It was based on the experience and knowledge of
the Office, which keeps documentation of its own on the countries of origin of
asylum-seekers.
4.5
The arguments presented to the Committee by the author have already been
adduced before the Swiss authorities and have been examined by ODR and CRA.
The author first attempted to prove that he was wanted by the police, invoking
two arrest warrants which in the view of ODR are forgeries. Secondly, to
support his claim that he was afraid of arrest, he furnished a list of members
of NADECO who had allegedly been arrested, and on which his own name appears;
according to information obtained by the Swiss Embassy in Lagos, however, that
list did not conform to reality. In fact, most of the individuals whose names
appear on it, and who according to the author have been detained, are not in
detention. According to the same sources, the author's name was unknown in
the inner circles of NADECO, nor was he sought by the police. Furthermore,
the author failed to produce, during the asylum process, any reliable official
document of attestation, with the result that his identity is not established
with certainty.
4.6
In addition, the author's statements contained a number of
discrepancies. With regard, for example, to Epe Town, the place where he is
said to have hidden before leaving the country, he provided two different
accounts of its geographical location, in Lagos and near Enugu, although those
two cities are 500 kilometres apart.
4.7
The author also contends that he risks persecution for his commitment
to respect for human rights in Nigeria - political activities in which he
has participated since his arrival in Switzerland. In the view of the
State party, however, there is insufficient reason to believe that the