CAT/C/59/D/634/2014 Complainants’ comments on the State party’s observations 5.1 In their submissions of 11 October 2015, the complainants provided a copy of the first complainant’s medical record for the period from 7 January 2014 to 12 June 2015, stating that he most likely suffers from a severe case of post-traumatic stress disorder. They state that his psychological situation is critical: he suffers from depression, anxiety and loss of appetite, has difficulties sleeping because of nightmares and has suicidal thoughts. The complainants also submit a copy of the medical report issued by the Amnesty International Danish Medical Group on 29 September 2015, in which the first complainant’s current physical and psychological symptoms are described and his score of 3.6 on the Harvard Trauma Questionnaire given, a score of above 2.5 being consistent with post-traumatic stress disorder. It is also confirmed in the report that physical injuries identified on the first complainant’s body during medical examination are compatible with the description of beatings to which he had been subjected in detention and that he reacts strongly to mention of the abuse he suffered. The complainants submit that, contrary to what is claimed by the State party (see para. 4.13), the aforementioned medical documentation represents new information. 5.2 With reference to the report on the security situation in Ingushetia issued by the Norwegian Country of Origin Information Centre (Landinfo) on 3 November 2014, the complainants submit that the security situation remains very serious. Mistreatment of detainees, described as torture by sources, is still taking place on a regular basis. The insurgents in Ingushetia are still active, owing to the spillover effect of the ongoing insurgency in neighbouring Chechnya. 13 Although the leader of Ingushetia claimed in an interview on 27 May 2015 that the North Caucasian insurgency in Ingushetia had been “defeated”, he also stated that “there [was] a long way to go” before it could be said to be completely destroyed.14 5.3 The complainants reiterate that they have a double motive for seeking asylum, as the first complainant fears persecution from both the insurgents and the authorities, and the authorities will not protect him from retaliation or reprisals by the insurgents (see para. 3.2). 5.4 In response to the State party’s argument as summarized in paragraph 4.14, the complainants submit that the letters in question had been mailed by the first complainant’s sister on 28 August 2014 and were received by them before the meeting of the Refugee Appeals Board on 12 September 2014. They refer to the text of the Board’s decision in relation to the first complainant as proof that the letters were mentioned during the hearing, but the Board did not comment on them in the decision. The complainants state, therefore, that the State party’s argument that the letters were presented only in their complaint to the Committee is factually incorrect. 5.5 The complainants argue that inconsistencies in the first complainant’s statements are explained by his poor psychological state and the torture to which he was subjected. They find it surprising, therefore, that the Danish immigration authorities expect him to give a precise explanation of details of lesser importance, such as what exactly he transported on 15 September 2013, the place to which he delivered goods or the circumstances when he woke up in prison. They state that there seem to be no significant differences in the first complainant’s statements and that small discrepancies could be due to the fact that his explanations have been translated. 13 14 Reference is made to an article published on the Caucasian Knot website on 21 September 2015, according to which several hideouts with weapons belonging to Chechen insurgents were discovered on the border between Ingushetia and Chechnya. Reference is made to the article entitled “Yevkurov says insurgency ‘defeated’ in Ingushetia” published on the Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty website on 8 October 2015. 9