CAT/C/60/D/677/2015 4.3 As to the complainant’s conversion to Christianity in Sweden, the State party notes that, in assessing whether conversions are genuine, migration courts resort to the Handbook and Guidelines on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status under the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, published by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in 2011. According to the Handbook and Guidelines, the question of determining whether events occurring after the individual’s departure from the country of origin are sufficient to justify a well-founded fear of persecution must be decided on the basis of a diligent examination of the facts of the case, paying particular attention to the possibility that the conversion may come to the attention of the authorities of the country of origin. In cases where the conversion is invoked shortly after the asylum decision becomes final, particular attention is paid to the credibility of the statements concerning the conversion. 4.4 In the present case, both the Agency and the Migration Court diligently assessed whether the complainant’s alleged conversion was genuine and reached the conclusion that the complainant lacked credibility on this issue. The State party notes that the complainant did not mention that he had an interest in Christianity, either during the asylum investigation on 18 June 2013 or in his written submission to the Agency dated 27 August 2013 or even in his appeal on 29 October 2013. It was not until 22 January 2014 that the complainant brought his conversion to the Agency’s attention and attached a certificate dated 6 December 2013. Also, it was not until his appeal against the Migration Court judgment lodged on 1 October 2014 that the complainant stated that he had questioned Islam as early as the age of 14, even though he had had numerous opportunities to raise the issue before. The State party also notes that, even though the complainant is a literate man, his answers were very vague, both when he was asked about the reasons for his conversion and when he was asked about the effects of this conversion on his life. Finally, the Agency and Court concluded that there were no grounds or evidence to support the assertion that the complainant’s conversion to Christianity in Sweden would have been brought to the attention of the Afghan authorities or anyone else in Afghanistan. On the contrary, the complainant’s fears that “people who had returned to Afghanistan would have shared information about his conversion with Afghan authorities” were mere speculations. Complainant’s comments on the State party’s observations 5.1 In his submission dated 29 January 2016, the complainant notes that, although neither the Afghan Constitution nor the Criminal Code make specific references to religious conversion, under some interpretations of Islamic law converting from Islam is deemed apostasy, and converts could be given three days to recant or might face, among other punishments, the death sentence. 5 The complainant notes that the Swedish migration authorities have acknowledged that the complainant has converted and that conversions from Islam may entail a death sentence in Afghanistan. In that regard, the complainant argues that his conversion is, in itself, enough for the Afghan authorities to issue a death sentence and that it is highly unlikely that these authorities will make any assessment to determine whether the conversion was genuine or not. 5.2 As to the assessment of the genuine nature of his conversion, the complainant notes that he has submitted as evidence strong testimonials from two senior representatives of the Mormon Church, who confirmed the sincerity of his conversion. However, this was not duly taken into account by national authorities, who focused on determining his age rather than on the reasons for his asylum application. He notes that his answers to the Swedish authorities were clear in stating that he understood Islam as “war and hate” and Christianity as “love” and that the new faith brought him “calmness in his life”, which is a very clear and positive answer from a religious perspective. However, he cannot be sure how the interpreters translated the questions addressed to him, in particular where interpreters might have a different religious background. In this regard, the Swedish authorities should have used sworn interpreters. Also, no oral proceeding was held before the Migration Court; it is very difficult for this court to assess the seriousness of his conversion without hearing him. 5 4 The complainant cites the International Religious Freedom Report for 2013 of the Department of State of the United States of America.