CAT/C/56/D/545/2013 application against Armenia, the Office found that the letter did not contain any statement regarding the admissibility or merits of the complainant’s claims. Moreover, the letter was of dubious authenticity because it lacked the Court’s stamp, did not feature the recipient’s address on the envelope and had been sent through the Swiss postal service even though the Court was located in France and the complainant was in Armenia at the relevant time. Regarding the documents the complainant had submitted to establish that a criminal case had been opened against him in Armenia, the Office found that the documents were not official, as they had not been stamped by the issuing authority, and were copies as opposed to originals. In addition, the documents did not refer to any concrete evidence concerning the complainant’s asylum-related allegations. The documents also indicated that the criminal proceedings against the complainant had been terminated after one month due to a lack of evidence. The documents were therefore considered to be of low probative value. The Office further considered that the political situation in Armenia did not provide a basis for non-refoulement. It also considered that the complainant and his wife were in good health and had substantial professional training, work experience and family connections in Armenia that would allow them to rebuild their lives there. On 28 October 2013, the Federal Administrative Court denied the complainant’s appeal of the decision not to grant him asylum. 2.5 In a further submission to the Committee dated 7 November 2013, the complainant asserts that his friend G, who lives in Armenia, threatened to harm him. The complainant claims that on 17 September 2011, two days before his escape from Armenia, G lent him $25,000 to help him settle in Switzerland. The loan agreement stipulated that the amount was to be repaid after three years, but that if the complainant were able to repay it earlier, G would have the right to demand repayment at that time. The complainant claims that he spent $3,000 of that amount and, when he arrived in Switzerland (at a refugee reception centre in Vallorbe), an official from the Federal Office for Migration confiscated the remaining $22,000. The complainant alleges that, despite his objections, the official kept the money and persuaded the complainant to declare half of the amount in his name, and the other half in his wife’s name. The complainant asserts that, although the official informed him that the amount would be returned to him at the end of the asylum process, that never occurred. The complainant also argues that, although he submitted a written request for restitution to the Federal Office for Migration, the Office informed him that it would never return his money to him. The complainant maintains that G has been demanding repayment for the past two years and constantly threatens to harm him. 2.6 In addition, the complainant submits that the authorities of the State party are indifferent to violations of basic human rights. He reiterates that he would be at risk of ill-treatment in Armenia and claims that on 6 November 2013 police officials beat and arrested peaceful political protesters in central Yerevan. He also claims that unsuccessful asylum seekers recently removed by the State party to Sri Lanka are being tortured in prisons there. 2.7 On 16 February 2014, the complainant informed the Committee that he had moved from Switzerland to Germany on 15 February 2014 because, as of 1 December 2013, he and his family were no longer entitled to social assistance and had been asked by the Swiss authorities to vacate their apartment. The complaint 3.1 The complainant asserts that the State party would violate his rights under article 3 of the Convention by forcibly removing him to Armenia, where he would be imprisoned and subjected to torture, inhuman treatment and harassment by NSS. The complainant maintains that he would be targeted due to his political views, his advocacy for opponents of the ruling party, and his former employment with NSS. He submits that NSS agents 4