United Nations Human Rights Website - Treaty Bodies Database - Document - Sessional/Annual Report of Committee - officers regularly come to the house to ask for him. The author states that it is therefore clear that the Sudanese Government considers him to be an informer for the Ba'ath Party and that it is known worldwide that collaborators of the opposition press in Sudan are under permanent danger of reprisals. Procedure before the Committee 4.1 On 14 February 1996, the Committee, acting through its Rapporteur for New Communications, requested the State party not to expel or deport the author to Sudan while his communication was under consideration by the Committee. In its request, the Committee took into account that the secretariat of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees had requested the Swiss Government not to return the author to Sudan since it was considered credible that he would be subject to persecution. 4.2 On 26 February 1996, the State party informed the Committee that it had suspended the deportation of the author and that the author had introduced both an application for review and an application for reexamination. At its sixteenth session, the Committee therefore decided to suspend the examination of the communication. 4.3 On 29 March 1996, the Appeal Commission rejected the author's application for review because he had failed to pay the required fee. On 25 April 1996, the ODR rejected the author's application for a reexamination of his case. The author did not appeal the decision, since he considered that an appeal would be ineffective. Observations by the State party 5.1 By its submission of 19 June 1996, the State party does not raise any objections to the admissibility of the communication. 5.2 The State party recalls that the author has had three occasions to explain his grounds for asylum in oral hearings, on 17 February 1995 at the Registration Centre, on 20 March 1995 at the cantonal hearing and on 18 May 1995 before the ODR. 5.3 The State party recalls that, according to Swiss legislation, a refugee claimant has to demonstrate that it is probable that he would suffer serious prejudices because of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a social group or political opinions. In interpreting these requirements, the authorities apply the test as laid down in article 3 of the Convention against Torture. Article 12LA of the Asylum Law states that declarations which are not sufficiently substantiated on essential points, are contradictory, or do not correspond with reality are not to be considered as probable. 5.4 In the instant case, the State party argues that the author's statements show numerous contradictions and incoherences on essential points. 5.5 The State party notes that the author bases his claim under article 3 of the Convention on his professional activities from 1985 to 1992, during which period he worked for companies which were affiliated with the Ba'ath Party. The State party points out, however, that at the three hearings, the author made contradictory statements concerning his professional activities. The State party recalls that the http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/de75e94f920bd0a0802565a600537744?Opendocument (84 of 109)16/10/2006 9:54:12 AM