CAT/C/48/D/414/2010 “government opponents and ordinary citizens alike face repression that discourages and punishes free expression and political activity”. 5 2.6 The complainant claims that after his arrival in Switzerland he intensified his political activism and that he had presented numerous pictures testifying to his involvement in demonstrations and political happenings, all published on the Internet. He claims that through his continued and resolute activism he has become a highly visible figure within the Ethiopian exile movement. He stresses that both his long absence from Ethiopia and his political views would put him at a real risk of being persecuted in case of return to his home country. The complainant refers to United States Department of State reports that state that Ethiopian police use torture methods against political opponents and critics. He also refers to reports of the Committee to Protect Journalists6 and a report by Human Rights Watch which states that detainees and convicted prisoners alike face torture and other ill-treatment, and he mentions a statement by the same organization that refers to the use of torture by Ethiopian police and military officials in both official and secret detention facilities across Ethiopia. He further refers to the Freedom House report “Freedom of the press 2009: Ethiopia” of May 2009, which states that the Government of Ethiopia monitored and blocked opposition websites and blogs, including news websites run by Ethiopians living abroad. The complaint 3. The complainant claims that his forcible return to Ethiopia would constitute a violation by Switzerland of his rights under article 3 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, since he risks being subjected to torture or other inhumane and degrading treatment by the Ethiopian authorities if returned. State party’s observations on admissibility and on the merits of the complaint 4.1 On 30 March 2010, the State party informed the Committee that the complainant will remain in Switzerland while his case is under consideration by the Committee or until the interim measures are lifted. 4.2 The State party submits that the complainant filed an initial application for asylum in Switzerland on 23 June 2006. He claimed that he feared being harassed as a supporter of Coalition for Unity and Democracy after the 2005 elections. This request was denied by the Federal Office for Migration on 18 August 2006. The appeal against that decision was dismissed by the Federal Administrative Court on 18 July 2008. On 10 March 2009, the complainant filed a second asylum application, claiming that his political activities in Switzerland were of such nature that the Ethiopian authorities would likely have a strong interest in arresting him. On 30 April 2009, the Federal Office for Migration rejected the application. In his appeal to the Federal Administrative Court, the complainant explicitly recognized that the decision of 18 July 2008 had entered into force and motivated his application only with political activities in which he participated in Switzerland. By its decision of 10 February 2010, the Federal Administrative Court rejected the appeal. 4.3 The State party submits that the complainant argues before the Committee that he would run a personal, real and serious risk to be subjected to torture if returned to his country, because of his political activities in Switzerland. He does not present any new elements that would call into question the 10 February 2010 decision of the Federal 5 6 4 The complainant refers to Human Rights Watch, World Report 2009 (New York, 2009), p. 71. The complainant refers to the report of the Committee to Protect Journalists, “Attacks on the press 2009: Ethiopia”.