CAT/C/60/D/639/2014 bombings”). In addition, the complainant first claimed that he had been by the side of his father when he was killed and then that he had not seen anything. 4.15 Regarding the reasons why his father would have been killed, the complainant first claimed that he had incited people against the Government or supported the rebels, and then he claimed that his father had not been involved in political activities. The complainant affirmed that his father had had relations with the armed groups active in Darfur, but that he was not aware of the kind of relations he had actually had with them. In addition, the complainant first claimed that he was unaware whether his father had been active for the rebel organizations or had taken part in the armed conflict against the Sudanese regime, then he declared that his father had been against the rebel organizations. 4.16 The State party further submits that the complainant has failed to be credible with regard to the reasons behind his asylum request — to escape from the civil war, and the death of his father — and that no elements in the file make it possible to establish that he would face a risk of repression as a consequence of his father’s alleged activities. 4.17 The State party concludes that the complainant has failed to demonstrate, through the evidence submitted and his allegations, that he is under a real, concrete and personnel risk of torture in case of return to the Sudan and invites the Committee to determine that the return of the complainant to the Sudan does not constitute a violation of the obligations of Switzerland under article 3 of the Convention. Complainant’s comments on the State party’s observations 5.1 With regard to the human rights situation in the Sudan, the complainant refers to two decisions of the European Court of Human Rights referring to members of the Justice and Equality Movement, in which the Court held that the situation of political opponents had become worst since the beginning of 2014. 36 The complainant adds that the general elections of April 2015 did not alter the situation and that the pressure and harassment against the media and civil society have continued after the elections. 37 5.2 Regarding his place of origin, the complainant notes that the State party brings forward the argument that the “confirmation of his residence” can be easily purchased and therefore has no value as evidence, and that the copy of the marriage certificate does not have any value as evidence either. The complainant submits that the standard of proof for asylum cases, as defined in article 7 of the National Asylum Law, does not require “full proof” but only to provide credible arguments. The complainant argues that he does not possess other identity papers and that the documents he presented are the only ones he was able to obtain. He submits that they are a valid proof of his identity, even though they may not be considered as “full proof”. The State party’s argument that this type of document can be purchased easily in the Sudan is not sufficient to question the credibility of the complainant. The complainant adds that he has no reason to delude the State’s authorities concerning his identity. 5.3 With regard to the State party’s assertion that the complainant’s statements are not credible and are inaccurate, he claims that the State party failed to take into consideration his social background and age. The complainant submits that he stated that he lived in “Hai el Wedi”, also spelled “Al-Wadi” which is considered as part of Kutum, 38 even though it is 45 minutes away by car. He explains that the reason why he was not aware of the number of inhabitants or the exact location of the hospital is because he only visited Kutum for shopping. He further submits that he was able to provide information on a refugee camp named Kassab; the name of several districts in Kutum and the military airport in Kutum; and the fact that the rebels had been in control in Kutum and that the city had been bombed by government forces in 2005. 36 37 38 See A.A. v. France, No. 18039/11, of 15 January 2015; A.F. v France, No. 80086/13, of January 2015. See Agence France Presse, “Sudan seizes print runs of 10 newspapers in crackdown” (25 May 2015). Available from www.yahoo.com/news/sudan-seizes-print-runs-9-newspapers-crackdown002336598.html. No further information is provided in that regard. 7