CAT/C/61/D/747/2016 extradition is requested on the basis of his common-law conviction after his departure from Turkey for Switzerland and before his activities in relation to PKK. The Swiss authorities have duly addressed the complainant’s concern that he would be subjected to treatment contrary to the Convention should he be extradited by requesting Turkey to provide diplomatic assurances to guarantee his integrity and to put a monitoring system in place. Complainant’s comments on the State party’s observations 5.1 On 4 April 2017, the complainant challenged the State party’s observations, reiterating the grounds against his extradition to Turkey. He urges the Committee to take into account political and constitutional developments in Turkey since the attempted coup in July 2016 and the subsequent state of emergency, which resulted in the more widespread use of torture, mass arrests and detentions of those suspected of cooperation with the Gülen movement or of supporting PKK, with implications for the independence of the judiciary. Furthermore, Turkey intended to suspend part of the European Convention on Human Rights in July 2016. Further to the declared state of emergency, the period of custody before bringing a detainee before a judge was extended to a maximum of 30 days and access to a lawyer for detainees was restricted, which eliminated an effective means of preventing cases of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment in the period preceding interrogations. Under the state of emergency, fair trial guarantees and human rights standards will be permanently lowered and all lawyers will be appointed by the Government.13 In the circumstances, there is a risk that the complainant would not have access to an independent lawyer. 5.2 The complainant emphasizes that the situation has changed since the Turkish authorities provided diplomatic assurances in 2012, which requires assessing anew the rule of law in Turkey and the value and reliability of the diplomatic assurances. The State party itself has acknowledged that the human rights situation in Turkey is alarming. In the light of these developments, European countries such as Germany, Italy and Greece stopped extraditions to Turkey, regardless of the diplomatic assurances provided, while Turkish diplomats have sought asylum in Switzerland. In December 2016, States members of the European Union requested that membership talks be frozen due to the assault on the rule of law in Turkey. 5.3 The complainant provides several press articles and international reports describing spying on Turkish nationals in Switzerland and other European countries. The complainant maintains that this demonstrates that the Turkish authorities know about his political activities abroad and his ties to PKK and explains why his extradition was requested many years after his conviction. He recalls that the Swiss press reported on the complainant’s case and the decision of the Federal Criminal Court in detail, in particular that he had contacts with high-ranking PKK members as a driver. The President of Turkey would have been informed that he had participated in demonstrations against the Turkish Government. 5.4 The complainant adds that he is still in detention and experiencing severe psychological problems. After another suicide attempt, he was admitted to hospital, from which he was discharged in April 2017. His fear of extradition creates an agony which amounts to torture in itself. 5.5 On 2 May 2017, the complainant’s counsel submitted that the complainant had been admitted to psychiatric custody in Station Etoine in Bern after trying to prepare to commit suicide. While visiting him, counsel observed two tattoos on his body: a 15-cm-long Orthodox cross on his back and a 10-cm-long inscription, “Fuck Erdogan”, on his left arm. The complainant explains that he was tattooed in 2013 and that the Orthodox cross reflected his Armenian and Christian roots. He stresses that his asylum case is not related to religion and that he has never shown his tattoos to his family, which demonstrates that he has not used them as an argument against his extradition. However, the medical staff would have seen the tattoos and they must have documented them in the assessment undertaken 13 10 Reference is made to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, “Securing access of detainees to lawyers”, doc. 14267, 15 February 2017.