CAT/C/57/D/611/2014 credible. These past events constitute a strong indication that the complainant would be exposed to the same kind of treatment if returned. 5.2 The complainant submits that it is unreasonable for the State party to request evidence that he is wanted in Kazakhstan. The complainant has not been in the country for 12 years and doesn’t have access to such information. The consistent pattern of mass violations of human rights continues to this day in Kazakhstan. Corruption is widespread in the Government of Kazakhstan, which makes it possible to cover up abuse by law enforcement agencies. 5.3 The complainant further submits that he is exposed to a risk of torture given the fact that he will be sent home without a passport, which will lead authorities to believe that he has sought asylum in the Netherlands. Regarding the eventual protection from the local authorities, the complainant submits that police impunity remains a norm. The Committee itself in its November 2014 review of Kazakhstan expressed concerned at the fact that less than 2 per cent of complaints of torture have led to prosecutions. 19 In its universal periodic review, Kazakhstan supported the recommendation that it establish an independent investigation mechanism for cases of torture. 20 5.4 The complainant contends that the risk of being subjected to torture has only increased over the years for those with Russian ethnicity and, while ethnicity is not the only risk factor, it is a significant factor. Information on the country shows that discrimination against ethnic Russians is still a big problem in Kazakhstan. In a statement dated 15 July 2009,21 the Independent Expert on minority issues stated that Kazakh courts have never received a discrimination complaint based on ethnicity or nationality. 5.5 The complainant furthermore claims that he still fears jihadis as they were one of the reasons why they fled the country. He also claims that the fear of extremism associated with “certain currents of Islam” is widespread, and that the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant is organizing “family trips” to the Syrian Arab Republic for Muslims from Central Asia. 5.6 The complainant admits that, while he was born Orthodox Christian, he left the faith and declared himself an atheist. He claims that the atheists face persecution. He cites a case of Aleksandr Kharlamov, an activist, who was charged with “inciting religious discord” after he published several social media posts of atheist nature. In a press release issued in May 2013, Human Rights Watch called on the Kazakh authorities “to amend or repeal the charges”.22 The complainant contends that he has satisfactorily established that his return to Kazakhstan would constitute violation of article 3 of the Convention by the State party. State party’s further submissions 6.1 In a note verbale dated 2 October 2015, the State party reiterates its position that the communication is groundless. The State party argues that there is no indication that the complainant would experience any problems if returned to his country of origin after 12 years of absence. The complainant has not shown that he was a member of any political, religious or social party or movement. The time that elapsed following the complainant’s departure from the country should be taken into account in this respect. 23 19 20 21 22 23 8 See CAT/C/KAZ/CO/3, para. 8. See A/HRC/28/10, para. 124.17. Available from www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/minorities/expert. See www.hrw.org/news/2013/05/21/kazakhstan-drop-religious-incitement-charges. The State party refers to the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Saadi v. Italy, 28 February 2008, application No. 37201/06. GE.16-09780