CAT/C/48/D/393/2009 and that it is unlikely that the Ethiopian authorities are able to identify each person, or that they even have knowledge of the affiliation of the complainant with the above organization. 4.6 The State party further argues that the complainant’s claim that she spoke in Amharic on a local Swiss radio station to her fellow citizens does not change the above appreciation of the case, in particular as the radio station contradicted the complainant’s assertion and stated that the complainant’s activity was limited to sending two articles to the responsible editor. 4.7 The State party submits that there is no evidence that the Ethiopian authorities have opened criminal proceedings against the complainant, or that they have adopted other measures towards her. Accordingly, the State party’s immigration authorities did not qualify as convincing the claim that the complainant has a function within the Ethiopian diaspora in Switzerland that would attract the attention of the Ethiopian authorities. In other words, the complainant has not established that if returned to Ethiopia she would run a risk of ill-treatment because of her political activities in Switzerland. 4.8 The State party submits that, in the light of the above, there is no indication that there are substantial grounds for fearing that the complainant’s return to Ethiopia would expose her to a foreseeable, real and personal risk of torture and invites the Committee against Torture to find that the return of the complainant to Ethiopia would not constitute a violation of the international commitments of Switzerland under article 3 of the Convention. Complainant’s comments on the State party’s observations 5. On 26 March 2010, the complainant reiterates her initial submission and submits that she continues to be politically engaged and that she has participated in numerous activities of CUDP/KINIJIT. She notes in particular that she had participated in a meeting of the GINBOT 7 and can be seen in photographs with the well-known founder of the movement, Berhanu Nega. She further published an article on the WARKA forum criticizing the new anti-terrorist legislation. The complainant reiterates that she is a very active member of the dissident movement of Ethiopians in Switzerland and that she had met Birtukan Mideksa before her arrest. She has organized several meetings and participated in numerous demonstrations, as well as posted several articles exposing her political views on the Internet. Citing the assessment of the NGO, Human Rights Watch, the complainant notes that the Ethiopian authorities have increased their surveillance of political opponents, including on the Internet.6 She therefore maintains that she would face an imminent, personal and real risk of torture if deported to Ethiopia. Issues and proceedings before the Committee Consideration of admissibility 6.1 Before considering a claim contained in a communication, the Committee must decide whether it is admissible under article 22 of the Convention. The Committee has ascertained, as it is required under article 22, paragraph 5 (a), of the Convention, that the same matter has not been and is not being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement. 6.2 The Committee recalls that, in accordance with article 22, paragraph 5 (b), of the Convention, it shall not consider any communications from an individual unless it has 6 6 Human Rights Watch, “One hundred ways of putting pressure: Violations of freedom of expression and association in Ethiopia,” March 2010.