CAT/C/49/D/432/2010 (a) The Ethiopian Government is actively and closely monitoring the opposition movement,3 both within Ethiopia and in exile. Following recently adopted anti-terrorism legislation, the crackdown on political dissidents by the Ethiopian authorities has intensified. A provision of the above-mentioned legislation establishes a penalty of 20 years’ imprisonment for “whosoever writes, edits, prints, publishes, publicizes, disseminates, shows, makes to be heard any promotional statement encouraging, supporting or advancing terrorist acts”, 4 and one analysis states that “the legislation conflated political opposition with terrorism”. 5 The complainant also refers to an analysis by Human Rights Watch, which states that “government opponents and ordinary citizens alike face repression that discourages and punishes free expression and political activity”. 6 Publications on the Internet critical of the Ethiopian authorities are of particular concern to the Government, as nationals turn more and more to the Internet for information. In support of her argument, the complainant refers to the Freedom House report “Freedom of the press 2009: Ethiopia”, which states that the Ethiopian authorities monitored and blocked opposition websites and blogs, including news websites run by Ethiopians living abroad. (b) There are numerous and unambiguous reports that the Ethiopian police is applying methods of torture against political opponents and critics. 7 Random arrests and lengthy pretrial detentions are common. Torture is often used to extract confessions and information. The complainant refers to a report by the Human Rights Watch8 that documents the use of torture by police and military officials in both official and secret detention facilities across Ethiopia. (c) The quality and content of the complainant’s critical articles, in which she harshly criticizes the regime of the Prime Minister of Ethiopia, Meles Zenawi, are of a level that suggests that the Ethiopian authorities would have a vital interest in monitoring her. The complainant is a well-educated intellectual who eagerly follows current political developments. Moreover, she is well connected within the dissident movement in exile, a fact that is demonstrated by the publication of her articles on the well-known dissident website cyberethiopia.com and her long-standing membership in KSOS. In addition, the complainant actively engages in online discussions and comments on the other activists’ entries. In the light of a well-documented crackdown on opponents in Ethiopia and the authorities’ practice of systematically monitoring critical websites and actively trying to identify outspoken critics, it is highly probable that the complainant’s identity is known to the Ethiopian secret service. (d) As to the argument of the Federal Administrative Court that the complainant had not established that she had personally written the articles in question, the complainant submits that the Swiss asylum authorities are best positioned to know whether there is indeed another person of Ethiopian nationality called H.K. in Switzerland, who is active within the Ethiopian dissident movement and publishes articles under the name of H.K. (Switzerland). According to the complainant, this argument amounts to a rather unlikely 3 4 5 6 7 8 Reference is made to a report of the Committee to Protect Journalists, “Attacks on the press in 2008: Ethiopia”, 10 February 2009; United States Department of State, 2009 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Ethiopia, 11 March 2010; “Ethiopia arrests 35 suspects in alleged coup plot”, Voice of America, 26 April 2009. Reference is made to a report of the Committee to Protect Journalists, “Attacks on the press 2009: Ethiopia” (16 February 2010). Ibid. Reference is made to Human Rights Watch, World Report 2009 (New York, 2009), p. 71. United States Department of State, 2009 Country Reports; Human Rights Watch, World Report 2010 (New York, 2010), p. 120. “UK: Ethiopian ‘assurances’ no guarantee against torture”, 17 September 2009. 5