CAT/C/54/D/440/2010 2.2 Once back in Guinea, the complainant worked at a coffee bar in Conakry and lived with his aunt. He sympathized with the opposition political party, the Union des Forces Démocratiques de Guinée (Union of Democratic Forces of Guinea) (UFDG). A demonstration was planned for 28 September 2009 at Conakry stadium to protest the power of the military and to request the holding of free and democratic elections. UFDG supporters gathered at the coffee bar where the complainant worked in order to prepare the event. During the demonstration, in which the complainant participated, he was arrested with his cousin by members of the armed forces and was taken to the Alpha Yaya military camp, where he was beaten, having been accused of incitement to civil disobedience. He was held with five other people for 3 days, during which he was tortured, beaten, imprisoned in harsh conditions and denied the right to a lawyer and to receive a visit from his family. 1 The complainant and the other detainees went three days without eating and were subjected to acts of intimidation. On 15 October 2009, plans had been made to take him to Kundara or to the island of Kasa to be executed. Thanks to a member of the armed forces whom he knew and who was able to argue on his behalf, the complainant was released. Si nce his name was on the list of government opponents, the complainant made plans, with his aunt ’s assistance, to leave for Belgium. 2.3 After the complainant’s escape 2 and his departure from Guinea on 31 October 2009, his aunt was continually harassed by State authorities and was summoned on several occasions and questioned about the complainant’s case. She therefore decided to leave the country herself and to go to a neighbouring country. 3 The complainant indicates that he is still wanted by the State of G uinea. 2.4 On 3 November 2009, the complainant arrived in Belgium, where he applied for asylum. On 15 December 2009, in accordance with the Schengen and Dublin agreements, he was sent back to Switzerland. On 10 February 2010, the Federal Office for Migration rejected the second asylum application he had lodged prior to his departure to Guinea and which had been suspended until his return. The complainant did not lodge an appeal. On 23 May 2010, he submitted an application for reconsideration to the Office on the grounds of the persecution he purports to have suffered in Guinea from the end of August to the end of October 2009. He attached the following documents to his application: a handwritten letter from his aunt recounting the facts, 4 the summonses (dated 16 October 2009 and 6 November 2009) from the General Directorate of the National Police addressed to him and those addressed to his aunt (three summonses), and a wanted-person notice issued by an investigating judge in Conakry. 2.5 On 23 June 2010, his request for reconsideration was rejected. The complainant had 30 days to lodge an appeal that would not have suspensive effect. After lodging his appeal, the complainant was informed that the judge of the Federal Administrative Court had considered that it had no prospect of success. 5 The complainant was therefore requested to pay the amount of 1,200 Swiss francs as a security deposit and as advance payment for legal costs. Given that the complainant had no means to pay the costs, on 17 August 2010, the Federal Administrative Court took a decision of nonconsideration (inadmissibility decision). Domestic remedies have thus been exhausted. __________________ 1 2 3 4 5 GE. 15-10885 These allegations of torture and ill-treatment were never brought before the national courts (see paragraph 4.4). In his communication to the Committee, the complainant refers to escape, but he also mentions that he was released because he had a friend in the military. The complainant does not provide any further clarification concerning the fate of his aunt. Copy of the letter attached to the communication (letter with no date). The Federal Administrative Court considered the appeal to be manifestly ill-founded and decided that the complainant would therefore not be granted free legal assistance. 3/7