CAT/C/53/D/450/2011 accompanied the complainant to the consulate reported that the complainant had incessantly insulted all those present and complained about his treatment in Switzerland and the situation in Yemen. In the statement of reasons for its decision, the Federal Office for Migration did not rule out that a hostile exchange between the complainant and the Consul may have occurred. However, the official, who mastered Arabic sufficiently to summarize the gist of the conversation, did not report any threats and did not recall the issue of Akhdam origin having ever been raised. Furthermore, the State party notes that the complainant submitted an application for reconsideration of his application for asylum to the Federal Office for Migration on the same day that he visited the consulate, without mentioning the alleged incident in his application. The complainant referred to the Consul’s threats only in 2009 as the basis for a new appeal following his arrest by the police after his two-year disappearance. The State party considers that the allegations of threats by the Consul of Yemen are therefore not plausible. 4.8 The State party also points out that the complainant alleges that he was accused in Yemen of theft, offence against honour and fraudulent procurement of false identity documents, whereas the summons to appear in court, which was contained in a newspaper that he submitted as evidence, cites alcohol consumption as the reason for the legal proceedings. The complainant has provided no suitable explanation in that regard. 4.9 The State party submits that, in the light of the foregoing, there are no substantial grounds to fear that the complainant would be genuinely and personally exposed to torture if he was returned to Yemen. His allegations and the evidence that he has provided do not lead to the conclusion that his return would expose him to a foreseeable, real and personal risk of torture. The State party therefore invites the Committee to find that the return of the complainant to Yemen would not constitute a violation of the international obligations of Switzerland under article 3 of the Convention. Complainant’s comments on the State party’s submission 5.1 On 11 October 2011, the complainant submitted his comments on the State party’s observations. As regards the situation in Yemen, the complainant notes that the State party recognizes the seriousness of the human rights and security situation. He adds that the situation has seriously deteriorated in recent months and refers to the report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights of 16 September 2011 (A/HRC/18/21), which confirms a disproportionate use of force by the security forces against popular uprisings in opposition to the Government, summary executions, arbitrary detentions and enforced disappearances. 5.2 The complainant adds that, if returned, he would be at even greater risk now that he has criticized the Consul of Yemen in Geneva, even though the fact that direct threats were made by the Consul is disputed by the State party. The complainant further adds that the State party has submitted only a summary of the report made by the official of the Federal Office for Migration, instead of the report itself, and that the State party has indicated that the official had a “sufficient mastery” of Arabic. The complainant concluded that the official did not master Arabic as a native speaker and that it was likely that she had not been able to identify the insults issued against the complainant. 5.3 Regarding the State party’s arguments about the lack of probative value of the medical certificate furnished by the complainant, the latter submits that the certificate reflects the tests performed by the doctor who treated him for six months and is based on a professional evaluation of his state of health. In addition, as regards the State party’s assertion that the torture he suffered should have left physical traces, he recalls that he showed the scars on his feet, ankles and legs to the representative of the State party during the first hearing on 2 October 2003 and points out that torture may also leave psychological traces. If there was any doubt as to what caused them, and given that they were recent, the 8 GE.15-00369