CAT/C/67/D/775/2016 he had learned about that arrest and left the country. These statements are clearly not credible. 4.12 Similarly, the complainant’s statements regarding his family are unconvincing. The complainant was unable to provide information about his wife and children. He stated that, before leaving Ethiopia, he had told his wife to go into hiding and did not know how to contact her thereafter. He was not able to provide any additional details about this. When invited to describe the discussions that he had had with his wife before his departure from Ethiopia, he evaded the question and stated that, at the time, he wanted to save his life and leave Ethiopia as soon as possible. All that he told his wife was that she had to go into hiding. These statements are evasive and not convincing. It is also implausible that the complainant had no idea how to contact his wife. 4.13 The complainant was unable to describe the car trip that he had taken from Addis Ababa to Khartoum, apart from describing a night spent in Gonder, Ethiopia, and his crossing the border on foot. He was also unable to provide any details about the flight that he had taken from Khartoum to Switzerland. He provided to the Swiss authorities an identity card issued on 5 August 2013, after his departure from Ethiopia. He claimed that he had left the card in a video store before leaving Ethiopia, and that friends had gone to look for it there. When invited to clarify these assertions, he responded with very confusing statements. 4.14 In view of the foregoing, there are no grounds for concluding that removing the complainant to Ethiopia would constitute a violation of the State party’s obligations under article 3 of the Convention. Complainants’ comments on the State party’s observations on the merits 5.1 In comments dated 7 June 2017, 25 January and 8 June 2018 and 20 March 2019, the complainant stated that, with financial assistance, he had been able to undergo a medical examination for signs of torture. He provides a report dated 10 May 2017 issued by a general practitioner, in which it is stated that the complainant was examined on 2 May 2017. It is also stated in the report that the complainant alleged to have been tortured by being “hit with a butt on the head” and by being hit repeatedly on his back with electric cables. It is also noted that: “one can see 10 restiform scars, which are crossways to the spine and between 10 and 15 cm long. The scars lay between the lower and the middle thoracic spine and are currently not irritated. In addition, there is a small scar at the end of the left shoulder blade as well as a long scar on the left side of the front which stems from the blow with the butt. At the end of the consultation, [the complainant] credibly told that the tortures of 2006 still affect and burden him a lot and that he would like to take care of his wife and children. The specified scars match the description given by [the complainant]. The described back pain cannot be objectified.” The report also contains a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder. The complainant maintains that the report substantiates his claims of having been subjected to torture. 5.2 The complainant also provides a second medical report, dated 14 December 2017, and a translation. He asserts that the doctor who prepared the report was a long-time consultant at the Swiss Red Cross for victims of torture and, therefore, an expert in examining signs of torture. According to the translated report, the doctor observed eight curved, palpable and reddish scars between the lower thoracic vertebrae and the sacrum, centred above the spine, of approximately 4 to 6 cm in length and of a maximum width of 5 mm. He concluded that the scars were consistent with a “typical scar pattern after strikes with a cable” and with the complainant’s account that he had been “tortured by strikes with electric cables” in 2007. The complainant reiterates that the Swiss authorities did not fulfil their duty to ascertain all the relevant facts, including by ordering a medical examination for signs of torture. 5.3 In response to the State party’s assertions regarding the complainant’s decision to stay in Ethiopia for six years after his release from detention, the complainant maintains that he was not detected by the authorities during that time because he was in hiding and changed his place of residence several times. He carried out his political activities in secret, so that the regime could not find him. This also explains why the complainant was able to 7