A/HRC/28/68/Add.1 124. En vista de las contradicciones entre la información presentada por el Estado y las alegaciones de las víctimas, el Relator Especial solicita mayor información al Gobierno de Cuba y a los denunciantes a efectos de dar seguimiento al caso. (b) JUA 21/07/2014 Case No. CUB 2/2014 State Reply: None to date Alegaciones en relación con presuntos ataques, amenazas, actos de hostigamiento y detención de defensores y defensoras de derechos humanos en Cuba. 125. El Relator Especial lamenta que, hasta la fecha, el Gobierno de Cuba no haya respondido a la presente comunicación, y por ello, considera que no ha cumplido con su deber de cooperar con el mandato establecido por el Consejo de Derechos Humanos en la resolución 25/13. Asimismo, el Relator Especial considera que el Gobierno no ha cumplido con la obligación emanada de la norma consuetudinaria internacional de investigar, juzgar y sancionar todos los actos de tortura y los tratos crueles, inhumanos o degradantes, como establece, inter alia, la Convención contra la Tortura (CAT). 126. Ante la falta de información que indique lo contrario, el Relator concluye que el Gobierno de Cuba, al no tomar medidas para proteger la integridad física y psicológica de los Sres. Roberto de Jesús Guerra Pérez, Jorge Luis García Pérez “Antúnez”, Ciro Alexis Casanova Pérez y la Sra. Yris Pérez Aguilera –defensores de derechos humanos-, es responsable por sus sufrimientos físicos y mentales y ha violado sus derechos a no ser torturados o sometidos a tratos crueles, inhumanos o degradantes como afirman los artículos 1 y 16 del CAT. Cyprus (a) JAL 24/04/2014 Case No. CYP 2/2014 State Reply: 01/07/2014 Allegations concerning the potential refoulement of Mr. A and his family 127. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of Cyprus for its reply, dated 01.07.2014, to the present communication. 128. The Rapporteur welcomes the account of the Government in response to the concerns, legal obligations and questions raised in the initial communication. He takes note of the information provided by the Government that the application for asylum of Mr. A and his family was properly reviewed and rejected by the Government of Cyprus as well as the offices of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; and that Mr. A had access to the appeals procedure after the Government rejected his refugee application. Moreover, the Rapporteur acknowledges the account of the Government regarding the rights and benefits enjoyed by Mr. A and his family while in Cyprus awaiting a decision on his refugee application. 129. Consequently, the Rapporteur concludes that the Government of Cyprus has properly analysed the refugee application of Mr. A and his family and ensured his and his family’s enjoyment of rights while awaiting the decision, and has not violated the right of Mr. A to have a fair opportunity to state a claim for refugee or asylee status. Nevertheless, the Rapporteur wishes to assert that the non-refoulement provision in the Convention against Torture (CAT), which is also a customary international law norm, is both more protective and narrower than the non-refoulement norm of the 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees. The CAT protects only against the risk of torture and ill-treatment, not more general “persecution.” But its prohibition is more absolute as it protects from refoulement even persons who do not qualify as refugees or asylees. Article 3 of the CAT still obliges States not to extradite, deport or otherwise return a person to any country or territory where that person could be at risk of torture. Should Mr. A or his family be deported to such a country, Cyprus would violate their right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as provided by articles 1, 3 and 16 of the CAT. 22