CAT/C/47/D/381/2009
Factual backgrounds
2.1
The complainant and his family are Iranian nationals and claim to have left the
Islamic Republic of Iran for political reasons.2 Upon his arrival in Switzerland, the
complainant submitted an application for asylum on 3 September 2000, which was turned
down by Federal Office for Refugees (now the Federal Office for Migration) on 19 April
2002. An appeal against that decision was rejected by the Swiss Asylum Appeals
Commission (now part of the Federal Administrative Tribunal) on 15 June 2004. The
complainant’s wife, Mitra Pishan, filed an initial asylum application on her own behalf and
on that of their son, Amin, on 20 March 2003.3 The application was rejected on 18 March
2004 by the Federal Office for Refugees and that decision was upheld by the Swiss Asylum
Appeals Commission on 15 June 2004. On 6 April 2005, the complainant requested that the
decisions of the Federal Office for Refugees of 19 April 2002 and 18 March 2004 be
reconsidered. That appeal was turned down by the Federal Office for Migration on 10
August 2005.
2.2
The complainant argues that, since October 2005, he has been a member of the
Democratic Association for Refugees, an Iranian migrant organization that he claims is
highly critical of the present regime in the Islamic Republic of Iran and attempts to raise
awareness of the woeful human rights situation there, including the issue of the death
penalty and the prevailing climate of discrimination against and repression of members of
the opposition and minorities.
2.3
In April 2007, the complainant was elected representative for the Canton of Obwald
by the executive committee of the Democratic Association for Refugees. In that capacity,
he has written articles denouncing the present regime in the Islamic Republic of Iran, which
have appeared in the association’s publications, and been involved in events organized by
NGOs and local churches in his canton in order to alert the public to the human rights
violations committed in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The complainant takes part in
meetings of the association’s leaders at the cantonal level and contributes to the strategic
planning of its activities. He works closely with the association’s executive committee,
directors and deputy director.
2.4
On the basis of his political activities in Switzerland, on 24 July 2006 the
complainant submitted a new asylum application, which was rejected by the Federal Office
for Migration on 4 October 2007. The court ruled that given the complainant’s political
profile and level of activities, he was unlikely to attract the attention of the Iranian
authorities. On appeal, that decision was upheld by the Federal Administrative Tribunal on
19 March 2009. The Tribunal argued that the Iranian secret service kept a close watch only
on the activities of persons whose role went beyond low-profile political protests of exiles,
and that the Iranian authorities were aware that asylum-seekers did all they could to
highlight their activities in order to secure residence permits in the host country. According
to the Tribunal, the complainant had not done enough to bring himself to the attention of
the Iranian authorities. Mere identifiability did not constitute a risk of persecution and only
those of the regime’s opponents who, by dint of their personality, represented a real threat
to the regime were kept under surveillance and on file. The Tribunal considered that the
close and regular contacts maintained by the complainant with cantonal and national
leaders of the Democratic Association for Refugees amounted to little more than the
association’s internal activities that did not raise his profile above that of any ordinary
member. As a result, the Tribunal considered that such activities did not expose him to any
2
3
GE.12-40167
There is no further mention in the file of “the political reasons” behind the departure from the Islamic
Republic of Iran of the complainant and his family.
The State party maintains that the application was made on 20 February 2003.
3