CAT/C/59/D/697/2015 INTERPOL at the request of the Rwandan authorities, who believe him to be in Belgium (see paras. 1.1 and 3.2). Also on this point, the State party points out that Belgium is a State governed by the rule of law, which gives due consideration to asylum applications and respects the principle of non-refoulement. Consequently, there is no indication that the Belgian authorities would not be able to assess the complainant’s reasons for applying for asylum and to rule on the validity of the arrest warrant in question. Complainant’s comments on the State party’s observations 5.1 The complainant presented his comments on the observations of the State party on 30 March 2016. He points out, first of all, that the State party has not disputed that he is a prominent politician or that he has held various official positions in Rwanda. As to the decision of the Committee cited by the State party, the complainant notes that a distinction should be made between his situation and that of the complainants in that case, who were merely Congolese junior officers serving in the police force and thus with no particular political profile. 4 The complainant, on the other hand, recalls that he was a member of parliament, then a minister several times and finally an ambassador until his departure from the country. He further recalls that he also co-founded a political party. 5.2 The complainant also notes that there have been numerous security failings in Belgium, as evidenced by the Brussels terrorist attacks of March 2016. He adds that recent events also bear witness to the risk faced by activists and political opponents in Belgium: the wife of the secretary of Forces démocratiques unifies-Inkingi, a Rwandan opposition political party in exile, was assaulted on 24 October 2009. The president of this party is currently serving a 15-year prison term in Rwanda; on 14 May 2011, a Belgian national of Rwandan origin living in Brussels was returned from London to Belgium on the grounds that he had been sent by the Government of Rwanda to kill two British citizens from Rwanda living in London; in August 2015, a Canadian journalist, Judi Rever, allegedly targeted because of her criticism of the Rwandan Government, was surprised to be met by security service officials at the reception desk of her hotel on her arrival in Brussels and to be provided with round-the-clock armed protection. The complainant also refers to a Radio France International report of 7 August 2015, according to which Faustin Twagiramungu, the former Rwandan Prime Minister and member of the opposition, was surprised to see members of the Belgian security services show up at his residence, without explanation. The complainant further cites a Jeune Afrique article of 10 September 2015, entitled “A Bruxelles, la méfiance règne dans la diaspora” (Mistrust prevails among the diaspora in Brussels);5 he also refers to the case of an active member of the Congrès national rwandais — an opposition party in exile — who was allegedly assaulted by unknown persons in Brussels on 10 March 2016. 5.3 The complainant therefore concludes that the State party goes too far when it considers that Belgium has law enforcement agencies at its disposal that are able and ready to afford protection to persons in its territory. According to the complainant, the fact that the Belgian police have afforded protection to certain persons in its territory shows that Rwandan dissidents in Belgium face real and serious threats. The complainant also points out that, while special protection is a possibility, it is not desirable since it would constitute an ongoing burden and constraint for him and members of his family, including his minor daughter who would be enrolled at school. The complainant reiterates that he would be safer in Switzerland, since no Rwandan political party is represented there. 4 5 6 M.K. and B.B. v. Switzerland. See http://www.jeuneafrique.com/mag/262364/societe/a-bruxelles-la-mefiance-regne-dans-ladiaspora-rwandaise. GE.17-01261