CAT/C/39/D/299/2006 Page 5 to submit identity documents within 48 hours since the asylum request had been filed. This Act was amended by Federal Act of 16 December 2005, which entered into force on 31 December 2005. The State party maintains that, from that date, both the ODR and the CRA thoroughly examined the issue of the complainant’s alleged persecution and concluded that the complainant’s statements were vague and not credible, in particular his description of his escape from prison. 4.3 The State party contends that the complainant has not submitted any evidence of his political engagement and alleged persecution. In the State party’s view, the only evidence that would prove his political activities in the Democratic Republic of the Congo was a certificate by the UDPS local representative in Lagos. According to the ODR, this document could be easily “bought” in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Additionally, the header of this “certificate” does not correspond to the text and the document is otherwise incomplete. The State party further questions the validity of the provisional arrest warrant and the search warrant allegedly issued by the Public Ministry in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and notes that the complainant has not explained how his family managed to obtain the original of these internal documents. It adds that DRC forms can be easily obtained and that the desired text could then be added. 4.4 The State party notes that, according to the interrogation records of 22 July 2004, the complainant’s knowledge of the political situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo did not reveal a political interest and, in particular, an interest in journalistic activities in the country. According to these records, the complainant had not been able to name any of the leaders of UDPS and did not show a detailed knowledge of the party’s structure.The State party contends that the complainant’s presentation of events is otherwise vague and poorly substantiated and that he is therefore not credible. Complainant’s comments on the State party’s observations on the merits 5.1 On 7 September 2007, the complainant recalls the appalling situation of human rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. It notes that the Committee has denounced that security forces continue to practice arbitrary detentions without any judicial control and to inflict torture on detainees. 2 Detention conditions, including overcrowdings, malnutrition and lack of medical care, put in danger the lives of detainees and a number of them are reported dead. It further notes that UDPS is one of the oldest opposition parties in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In summer 2005 this party organized demonstrations against the deferment of elections and 10 demonstrators resulted dead. In March 2006, UDPS members demonstrated in Kinshasa against the new electoral act and were repressed by security forces with truncheons and tear gas. In May and June 2006, UDPS members were arbitrarily arrested and ill-treated in Mbuji-Mayi. The complainant notes that journalists who are critical with the regime are constantly targeted by Congolese authorities. In this context, the complainant maintains that he would be subject to a risk of torture if returned, in light of his double condition of journalist and UDPS militant, as well as the fact that he is being searched by the authorities since his escape from prison. 2 CAT/C/DRC/CO/1/CRP.1, para. 7.