CAT/C/60/D/662/2015 about Christianity demonstrated that he did not actually hold religious convictions and that his purported conversion was not credible. 2.6 The authorities were of the view that the claim to have converted to Christianity made by the complainant in his second application for asylum had not been substantiated to a sufficient degree to justify granting him asylum. The State Secretariat for Migration and the Federal Administrative Court concluded that his conversion to Christianity was not credible and that its sole purpose was to obtain permission to stay in Switzerland. They pointed out that, during his interview of 28 July 2014, the complainant was unable to give his reasons for having converted. He made general statements such as “Christianity is a world of affection and love”; he was not able to demonstrate knowledge of the Bible and replied that he was lazy and did not like to read. In addition, he did not know the priest or the staff of the church that he attended. The Court stated that, even if his conversion were found to be credible, it would not in itself constitute a basis for persecution. As to the complainant’s claim that he would be at risk because of his political activities in the State party, the Secretariat and the Court were of the view that, even if the Iranian authorities track the opposition’s activities abroad, only persons with a high political profile are regarded as posing a danger to the current political regime. The authorities also emphasized that, although the complainant’s counsel furnished a document issued by the Iranian Socialist Party in which it attested to his membership in that party, the complainant himself had denied belonging to any political organization. Consequently, the authorities concluded that he was not at risk of persecution by reason of his political activities in Switzerland in opposition to the Iranian regime. The complaint 3.1 The complainant contends that his deportation to the Islamic Republic of Iran would constitute a violation of his rights under article 3 of the Convention. In his view, the Swiss authorities have not properly weighed the risk to which he would be exposed in the Islamic Republic of Iran owing to his conversion to Christianity and his political activities in opposition to the Iranian regime when he lived in the State party. 3.2 The complainant refers to the decision reached by the Committee in Azizi v. Switzerland9 and asserts that reports indicate that Christians, especially Muslims who have converted, are persecuted in the Islamic Republic of Iran. They are arrested, imprisoned, subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and tried by revolutionary courts in violation of international human rights standards. 10 Moreover, conversion from Islam to Christianity is regarded as apostasy and can be punished by death under sharia law. While practices differ from one region to the next, there have been a number of cases in which people have been sentenced to death. In his case, he had tried to interest other Iranians in Christianity, had invited them to the Charismatic Christian church and had encouraged them to convert to Christianity. He maintains that he has a bad reputation in the Iranian Muslim community in Switzerland and that some of the Iranians with whom he spoke about Christianity have since returned to the Islamic Republic of Iran. Finally, he asserts that the Swiss authorities cannot ask him to conceal his religious beliefs and refrain from practising his religion if he is sent back to the Islamic Republic of Iran. 3.3 The complainant contends that the Iranian Government does not show tolerance towards members of the opposition. Opponents of the current regime are persecuted, arrested and tortured. Furthermore, political opposition activities are punishable under the country’s revised Criminal Code. The complainant also claims that the Government has recently set up a cyberpolice surveillance unit to track political activity on the Internet. He thinks that his website has in all likelihood been blocked and is not accessible in the Islamic Republic of Iran.11 9 10 11 GE.17-12101 Communication No. 492/2012, Azizi v. Switzerland, decision adopted on 27 November 2014. The complainant refers to report A/HRC/22/48 of the Secretary-General; to a brief overview by Amnesty International on Christian converts in the Islamic Republic of Iran; and to the Country of Origin Information Report — Iran of the United Kingdom Home Office, dated 28 June 2011. The complaint is not accompanied by any documents to support this claim. 3