Advance unedited version CAT/C/67/D/857/2017 4.12 The complainant further argues that reports and findings by the Council of Europe, various UN Special Procedure mechanisms and Treaty Bodies show existence of consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights in Turkey during the last 30 years. The complainant submits that the country of origin information, combined with his personal circumstances, being his ethnicity, political views and past torture, should have been considered by both, the asylum and extradition authorities of the State party, as substantial grounds for believing that he would be exposed to foreseeable, personal, present and real risk of torture and ill-treatment if extradited to Turkey. State party’s observations on the merits 5.1 On 5 November 2018, the State party submitted its observations on the merits. The State party notes that on 5 December 2016, the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Serbia informed the Republic of Turkey about the complainant’s arrest based on the active international warrant of Interpol, and asked for an extradition request to be submitted along with the required documentation. On 29 December 2016, the Ministry of Justice received the request for extradition along with the required documents translated into Serbian language. The following day, these documents were forwarded to the High Court in Šabac (with supplements on 6 and 9 January 2017). On 9 May 2017, the High Court in Šabac returned the documents to the Ministry of Justice due to “incomprehensible translation”. On 12 May 2017, the Ministry of Justice submitted the returned documents to a certified Turkish translator and the new translation was submitted to the High Court in Šabac on 21 July 2017. By a letter dated 15 August 2017, the High Court in Šabac requested clarifications regarding the complainant’s criminal offence. The requested information was provided to the court by the Ministry of Justice on 4 and 5 October 2017. On 27 November 2017, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees intervened and requested that the complainant should not be extradited before authorities make final decision on his asylum request. This intervention was forwarded to the High Court in Šabac on 6 December 2017. On 1 December 2017, the Ministry of Justice received the decision of the Asylum Commission denying the complainant’s appeal. On 15 December 2017, the High Court in Šabac forwarded to the Ministry of Justice the final decision in the complainant’s extradition case, confirmed by the Appellate Court in Novi Sad on 14 December 2017. On 15 December 2017, the Minister of Justice of the Republic of Serbia issued a decision allowing the extradition of the complainant to the Republic of Turkey. On 18 December 2017, the decision was served to the Interpol’s Belgrade office. On the same day, the Ministry of Justice received, through the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Serbia in Geneva, the documents related to the complainant’s individual communication. 5.2 The State party rejects the complainant’s claim that there has been no adequate translation from Turkish to Serbian of the documents received from Turkey for over a year. It notes that based on the court’s request for a revised translation of the provided documents, the Ministry of Justice engaged a local certified Turkish translator. 5.3 The State party further notes that in accordance with the European Convention on extradition or any other multilateral or bilateral extradition documents, there is no requirement to translate an entire case file to the language of the State party which is requested to extradite an individual. Only documents mentioned in article 12 of the European Convention on Extradition,7 of which both Serbia and Turkey are Contracting Parties, must be attached to the request for extradition, as no other state is authorized to evaluate and examine legal proceedings conducted in another state. 7 Article 12 of the European Convention on Extradition states that the request for extradition shall be supported by: a) the original or an authenticated copy of the conviction and sentence or detention order immediately enforceable or of the warrant of arrest or other order having the same effect and issued in accordance with the procedure laid down in the law of the requesting Party; b) a statement of the offences for which extradition is requested. The time and place of their commission, their legal descriptions and a reference to the relevant legal provisions shall be set out as accurately as possible; and c) a copy of the relevant enactments or, where this is not possible, a statement of the relevant law and as accurate a description as possible of the person claimed, together with any other information which will help to establish his identity and nationality.