CAT/C/53/D/450/2011 on the patient’s account of his medical history and therefore merely reflects his complaints about his ailments. Consequently, the complainant’s allegations concerning the ill-treatment he experienced in prison lack plausibility, and there is no reason to believe that he would risk being exposed to torture for this reason if returned to Yemen. 4.3 The State party further argues, with reference to the Committee’s general comment No. 1, that another factor to be taken into account when assessing the complainant’s risk of being subjected to torture if returned is whether he has engaged in political activities in or outside Yemen. The State party notes that the complainant does not mention that he was politically active prior to his departure from Yemen. 4.4 The State party also points out that following the rejection of his asylum application and his two appeals for reconsideration, the complainant went into hiding and was registered as missing on 13 October 2007. After he was found by the police on 7 November 2009 in the course of an identity check in Biel/Bienne, he submitted a second application for asylum to the Federal Office for Migration on the basis of threats that the Consul of Yemen allegedly made against him on 22 February 2007. The complainant became politically involved after eluding the authorities for two years and after seeing his application for reconsideration rejected by the Federal Office for Migration, which he filed in order to avoid being returned following his arrest. He then invoked his political activities in his appeal to the Federal Administrative Court on 11 March 2010 against the dismissal decision of the Federal Office of Migration. He attached his organization membership card to his appeal, six articles criticizing the Government published in his name in a magazine and on the Internet and the report of a demonstration mentioning his name and showing a photograph of him. Yet, along with his communication to the Committee, the author submitted additional information in which he claims to have taken part in three demonstrations, to have organized and participated in various meetings and to be recognized as an active militant for the Southern Democratic Assembly in Switzerland. The State party also notes that during the initial asylum proceedings, the complainant stated that he was illiterate. 4.5 It is likely that the authorities monitor the political activities of Yemeni nationals in exile but that they are not concerned with the identity of particular individuals until their activities go beyond ordinary mass protests and reveal them as serious opponents who pose a threat to the Government. The complainant’s mere participation in demonstrations and drafting of critical articles do not make him appear to be a particularly high-profile activist. Consequently, the State party is of the view that the complainant’s political activities do not expose him to a probable risk of torture if he is returned to Yemen. 4.6 There are factual inconsistencies in the complainant’s assertions that undermine his credibility. The State party maintains that the complainant’s account of his escape from prison with the assistance of his former employer is not convincing. The employer was angry at the complainant for having concealed that he belonged to the Akhdam caste and had no reason to fear the authorities’ reaction to statements made by the complainant, given that he belonged to a low caste. 4.7 The State party also refers to the complainant’s allegations concerning the threat of reprisals that the Consul of Yemen allegedly made against him during his visit to the consulate in Geneva. The complainant also alleged that his name had been included in a list of asylum seekers handed over to the Yemeni authorities, accompanied by a note from the Consul indicating the treatment to which the complainant was to be subjected if he was returned. The State party submits that, while it is true that information enabling the complainant to be identified was transmitted to the Yemeni authorities in accordance with article 97, paragraph 3, of the Asylum Act of 26 June 1998, the Swiss authorities were nevertheless not allowed to mention or provide information relating to an asylum application. The State party also notes that the Federal Office for Migration official who GE.15-00369 7