CAT/C/67/D/828/2017 the complainant with regard to the problems he claimed to have encountered thereafter. If that event really was the source of his problems, the complainant should have been able to provide more information about the persons present. 4.16 In addition, the complainant’s statements about being present during visits by National Intelligence Agency officers to his family home, the dates of these visits and the summonses and/or warrant(s) allegedly filed, were brief, disordered and even contradictory, and were not supported by any evidence. Furthermore, the claim – made only at the stage of the appeal before the Federal Administrative Court – that the complainant’s father, a close friend of General Munene, had been arrested, is a mere assertion, not based on any objective, tangible or substantial evidence. That claim also contradicts statements made by the complainant during the hearings. The complainant had said that his father had also fled the country because he had allegedly received warrants for arrest “because of ill-intentioned traders”. 4.17 Moreover, the complainant has not provided a body of tangible, specific and consistent evidence to establish that his links with General Munene are close enough for it to be believable that the authorities of their country of origin would consider him to be of interest. Contrary to the complainant’s statements before the Federal Administrative Court, he neither said, nor, a fortiori, established, that he is a close relative or friend of General Munene, having simply indicated that he comes from near the same village in Bandundu province and is of the same ethnic group. 4.18 With regard to the evidence, some of which does not concern the complainant, the State party notes that such evidence confirms that the complainant took part in the training course organized by the International Centre for Training in Human Rights and Development, but does not show that the alleged harm mentioned in support of the asylum application actually occurred or attest to a well-founded fear of persecution. The letter from General Munene and the – unpublished – article written by a member of Armée de résistance populaire have no probative value, because, on the one hand, they do not mention the problems that the complainant claims to have had and, on the other, it is easy to obtain such documents, which appear to have been drafted as a favour for the sake of the cause. 4.19 In view of the inconsistency of the complainant’s account and the lack of tangible evidence, there were no grounds for undertaking any additional investigations, such as a request to the Swiss mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. 9 In his complaint, the complainant does not explain the inconsistencies and reiterates the facts as have already been considered by the Swiss authorities. He produces evidence that has already been presented to and examined by the national authorities. The State party also emphasizes that the complainant was returned to his country of origin following his registration for the assisted voluntary return programme, after the submission of the present complaint. 4.20 Finally, the complainant does not credibly establish that he has been subjected to treatment contrary to the Convention since his return to the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The most recent news available to the State party about the complainant’s situation in his country of origin is that contained in the annex to an email dated 21 June 2017, in which the complainant’s counsel stated that the complainant “had been in touch from the Democratic Republic of the Congo”. He once again explained that the complainant had allegedly been forced to leave Switzerland under pressure from the IOM representative and the Geneva police and that, on his arrival in Kinshasa, his passport had been confiscated and he had allegedly been threatened at the airport. The complainant had then allegedly been taken away and placed in detention, where he had allegedly been tortured and questioned about his links to General Munene. He had been “crying in his native language” and someone had helped him to escape. He was allegedly now living in hiding with the family of General Munene. No other evidence has been produced to corroborate those statements. 9 6 The State party explains that such investigative action is not initiated ex officio, contrary to the claims made by the complainant. GE.19-14950