CAT/C/56/D/562/2013 The complaint 3.1 The complainant submits that Canada would violate his rights under article 3 of the Convention against Torture if it forcibly returned him to Uganda, where he “will certainly be killed and tortured for being gay”. He states that he has the basic human right to choose and control his own sexuality and sexual orientation. He states that he is a gay rights activist in Canada, that the Ugandan security forces believe that he is the leader of a group called Rainbow and that, as such, he is at risk of being killed and tortured for being gay. The complainant claims that he also fears that ordinary Ugandan citizens will turn him in to the police once they realize that he is gay. 3.2 The complainant alleges that the decision of the Refugee Protection Division was flawed because it was based solely on the criticism that the documents provided by the complainant were mostly post-dated and provided solely for the purpose of the hearing. The complainant rejects that determination and states that he provided the documents because the instructions for completing the refugee claim required him to prove his claim. 3.3 The complainant asserts that because Canadian law prevents him from filing a preremoval risk assessment application if fewer than 12 months have passed prior to the denial of his refugee claim, he has been deprived of the opportunity to submit new evidence that is relevant to his asylum case. 3.4 The complainant also alleges that his application for leave and judicial review was unfairly denied in a one-line decision that did not reflect a proper review of the complainant’s application. State party’s request for suspension 4.1 On 27 March 2014, the State party requested the Committee to suspend the examination of the complaint until the current domestic proceedings had been concluded. It recalled that the complainant had arrived in Canada on 14 October 2010 and filed an application for refugee protection on 15 February 2011. On 19 October 2012, the complainant had been found not to be a refugee within the terms of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the Protocol thereto, and not to be a person otherwise in need of protection by the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada. His application to seek leave for a judicial review of that decision had been dismissed by the Federal Court of Canada on 20 March 2013. 4.2 The State party also recalled that Section 112 (2) (b.1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act provides that a claimant cannot apply for an additional risk assessment (a pre-removal risk assessment) if fewer than 12 months have passed since the assessment by the Refugee Protection Division of his or her claim for refugee protection or since a previous pre-removal risk assessment. In the complainant’s case, the 12-month period came to an end on 19 October 2013 and on 11 March 2014, the complainant submitted an application for a pre-removal risk assessment. As the application was outstanding, the State party requested the Committee to suspend its consideration of the communication until the assessment had been completed. The State party underlined that the complainant was not subject to removal while his application was outstanding. 4.3 On 23 April 2014, the State party informed the Committee that on 9 April 2014, after evaluating all of the evidence provided and on the basis of detailed reasoning, the specialized risk-assessment officer had found that the complainant had not established that there were substantial grounds to believe that he would be at risk of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment if he was returned to Uganda. The complainant was informed of that decision on 17 April 2014. 5