CCPR/C/121/D/2643/2015 grounds for claiming asylum, which were that her life would be in danger in the event of her return to Sri Lanka because her younger brother had allegedly been a member of LTTE, and because she feared reprisals from her former husband. In its decision of 22 June 2015, the Board considered the author’s most recent grounds for claiming asylum, which were that she feared being persecuted by the authorities in the event of her return to Sri Lanka because of her and her family’s alleged affiliation with LTTE. The author repeated that she feared reprisals from her former husband. The State party considers that no substantial new information or views were presented in the author’s communication of 13 August 2015 to the Committee. 4.5 On 10 January 2014, the Board also stated that, regardless of any pressure exerted on the author by her former husband, it appeared from the information available that she had made false statements about her grounds for seeking asylum throughout the asylum proceedings. Hence, the new grounds for asylum asserted by the author could not be considered as facts. Moreover, the alleged affiliation of the author’s brother with LTTE prior to the author’s departure from Sri Lanka could not independently justify granting her residence. On 22 June 2015, the Board said that the new grounds for asylum asserting that she would risk abuse due to her and her family’s affiliation with LTTE could not lead to a different assessment, and that those grounds for asylum could not be considered as facts. The author has continually changed and elaborated on her statements to the Danish authorities about her and her family’s affiliation with LTTE, which, in the opinion of the State party, weakens the author’s general credibility. 4.6 The State party also observes that, at both interviews conducted by the Swiss authorities in 2001, the author stated that she had travelled to Switzerland with the sole purpose of marrying her intended spouse, who was living in Switzerland. She stated that one of her brothers had been shot by the Sri Lankan Army on 14 April 2000 because a person unknown to the author had incorrectly informed the Army that her brother was a member of LTTE. The author then argued that this was not correct, and that her brother had not been affiliated with LTTE. The author also stated that her brother-in-law had been taken by the Sri Lankan Army about five years before her departure, as he had been suspected of being an LTTE supporter, and that she did not know whether he was still in prison. The author further stated that two of her other brothers had disappeared during the war and that she had not seen them since their disappearance in a major attack in 1991. Finally, the author stated that her mother, her sister and another brother of hers lived in Sri Lanka, and that her father had died. 4.7 As regards her own situation, the author stated that she had not been politically active and that she had had no problems with the authorities. When asked whether she had ever been in prison, she replied in the affirmative, stating that she had been detained once by the Sri Lankan Army in 2001 for an inspection and that she had been released immediately. The author answered that nothing had happened to her personally. She replied in the negative when asked whether she had had other reasons for leaving her country of origin and coming to Switzerland. It appeared from her account that she had never been affiliated with LTTE in any way, that she had never personally experienced any other conflicts or problems with the authorities, and that the authorities had never considered her to be a person of interest. Accordingly, the State party submits that it cannot be assumed that the author and her brothers and parents have been affiliated with LTTE in any way, as subsequently submitted by the author. 4.8 From the author’s Swiss asylum case documents, it transpires that the author’s former husband was granted temporary residence for reasons other than asylum. The author applied for asylum in Switzerland, but her application was rejected. She was granted temporary residence because her former husband had been granted temporary residence. 20 The author’s appeal of the decision rejecting her application for asylum had lapsed due to her entitlement to temporary residence. Consequently, the information submitted by the author to the Danish Immigration Service claiming that she had been granted residence in Switzerland because of her brother’s affiliation with LTTE is not correct. The author’s 20 6 The author’s former husband’s temporary residence permit was withdrawn following his expulsion from Switzerland.