CAT/C/50/D/463/2011 were women and children, and laid down their arms. When the superintendant saw this, he pointed his gun at them and threatened to shoot them. Later that same day, when he was back at the military camp, he was arrested by the police and taken to a military prison in Gubah. He was accused of not following orders and of State perfidy. While in prison, he was assaulted and insulted. 2.2 In August 2005, the complainant was released from prison but instructed to report to the police station twice a day, even if he was sick. When he reported to the police, he was often beaten and threatened by policemen. In October 2005, un known men went to the complainant’s home, one of them showed a police identification card and took him to a police station, where he was interrogated regarding the incident in Andizjan. He was locked in the basement of that police station for three days. During that time, he was beaten and insulted on several occasions. On the third day, he was transferred to a prison in Kashkadarya. He was sentenced by a military court, without a real trial and access to public defence counsel, to three years’ imprisonment. He never received a copy of the judgment. While in prison, he was also beaten and threatened by prison staff. After the first year, he was forced to sign different documents. In June 2008, he was released and instructed to report to the police every day. He was not allowed to travel. Each time he reported to the police, he was insulted and humiliated by police officers. 2.3 In December 2008, the complainant left Uzbekistan for Kazakhstan. He travelled by smuggling routes and bribed a person to pass the border control. A few days after he had left, the police went to his house and threatened his wife with imprisonment and torture. Her passport, her children’s birth certificates and the couple’s marriage certificate were taken away. On 5 or 6 January 2009, his wife also left Uzbekistan, together with their two children, and joined the author in Kazakhstan. The complainant and his wife left their children with a cousin of hers in Kazakhstan and travelled to St. Petersburg in the Russian Federation and then to Sweden by boat, with false Russian passports. Upon arrival in Sweden on 19 January 2009, the complainant, with the false identity of J.B.M., and his wife filed an application for asylum. After informing the authorities about the events they faced in their country of origin, they claimed that they could not return to Uzbekistan as they would risk imprisonment or being killed: the author for having strayed from his obligation to report to the police and not to travel and his wife for breaking her promise to the police to disclose her husband’s whereabouts. He submitted birth certificates as proof of identity as J.B.M.. No other document of identification or to support his claim was submitted in support of their asylum account. 2.4 On 5 June 2009, the Swedish Migration Board rejected the complainant’s asylum application. The Migration Board stated that the narrative in the asylum request was vague and did not disclose information about any form of persecution on the grounds of race, nationality, social group, religion or political beliefs, by the authorities in the country of origin and that there were no reasons to believe that the complainant and his wife would risk any greater penalties than anyone who had committed an offence. The Board further noted that the complainant had not been able to provide any identification documents or written evidence in order to prove that he had been sentenced to three years’ imprisonment and that he had travel restrictions or police reporting obligations. Although the Board did not doubt the Uzbek origin of the complainant and his wife, it concluded that his reasons to justify this lack of evidence were contradictory, not probable and therefore not credible. 2.5 According to the Migration Board’s decision, the complainant made contradictory declarations as to the possession of identification documents. In his submission through his legal counsel, he stated that his passport, military identity card and driving licen ce had been seized by the police. However, in the interview at the Migration Board, he and his wife said that they had asked their parents to send his driving licence and his wife’s diploma in order to prove their identities. The complainant also withdrew part of his statement as to the demonstration that took place in Andizjan and the location of his regiment, whereas his wife did not remember the route by which she travelled to Kazakhstan , although she alleged 3