CAT/C/62/D/696/2015 profile LTTE members were able to leave Sri Lanka by paying bribes. 15 During his journey, he was always accompanied by a human smuggler and people always met him at airports to make sure he did not have any problems with the authorities. The fact that he was able to leave, return and leave again does not indicate that he was not wanted by the Sri Lankan authorities. Additional comments by the complainant 8.1 On 14 and 18 April 2017, the complainant submitted additional comments. The complainant rejects the State party’s assertion that he was never involved with LTTE. He states that during the ceasefire between LTTE and the Government of Sri Lanka (2002– 2006), he decorated the area around his shop with LTTE paraphernalia, such as flags and posters, whenever there was an LTTE event. He also states that his activities were filmed by the Sri Lankan authorities. He further states that he paid money to LTTE. When the ceasefire ended, he was confronted with these activities in 2008 and accused of being an LTTE sympathizer. Those activities are regarded as LTTE involvement by the Sri Lankan authorities. 8.2 The complainant also rejects the State party’s claim that, since he was issued a passport, there was no ban preventing him from leaving his place of residence. The complainant refers to the Netherlands, Ministry of Foreign Affairs country report on Sri Lanka dated 2 October 2014, which states that it is possible to buy falsified documents, stamps, stickers and forms in Sri Lanka. Besides, the culture of corruption and the use of altered registration and archiving procedures is widespread and increases the risk of inaccuracy and fraud at the registration and issuance of documents. Therefore, the fact that a passport was issued to him, does not indicate that there was no ban prohibiting him from leaving the area or his residence. 8.3 The complainant also challenges the State party’s argument that the Sri Lankan authorities are aware that many Tamils — from the north and east of Sri Lanka — returning from Western countries, left Sri Lanka for economic reasons. The complainant believes that the authorities in Sri Lanka will assume that he applied for asylum abroad and that he would be regarded as a traitor because he would have told the Western authorities about the human rights violations in Sri Lanka. The Centre for Post-doctoral Education (CPO) in the Netherlands publishes the Government’s report on international human rights procedures every year. The report contains cases pending before the Committee against Torture, including that of the complainant. The information is available on the Internet and, therefore, the Sri Lankan authorities can access it. The complainant thinks this will increase the risk of treatment contrary to article 3 of the Convention if he returns to Sri Lanka. State party’s additional observations 9.1 On 1 August 2017, the State party submitted additional observations on the merits of the communication. It reiterates that the complainant needs to substantiate that there is a foreseeable, real, personal and present risk of torture upon his return to Sri Lanka. The State party refutes the complainant’s contention that it uses outdated jurisprudence and information when assessing asylum applications submitted by Sri Lankan Tamils. It notes that both IND and the domestic courts assessed the asylum seeker’s account carefully in the light of up-to-date country of origin information. While noting that the situation of Tamils, in general, and former LTTE members, in particular, remains a cause for concern, the State party emphasizes several positive developments that have taken place in Sri Lanka. The Government of Sri Lanka has made incremental progress in addressing impunity for human rights violations. It has established a committee to examine allegations of torture and take preventive measures. The Government has pledged to repeal the Prevention of Terrorism 15 See, for example, International Truth and Justice Project — Sri Lanka, A Still Unfinished War: Sri Lanka’s Survivors of Torture and Sexual Violence 2009–2015 (June 2015), pp. 25–26; Danish Immigration Service, Human Rights and Security Issues concerning Tamils in Sri Lanka, Report from Danish Immigration Service’s fact-finding mission to Colombo, Sri Lanka, 19 June to 3 July 2010 (October 2010); and Schweizerische Flüchtlingshilfe (SFH), “Sri Lanka: Gefährdung rückkeh-render tamilischer Personen–Auskunft der SFH-Länderanalyse” (June 2015), p. 15 (in German only). 9