CAT/C/46/D/399/2009 2.5 On 9 September 2009, when the complainant submitted his complaint to the Committee, he included an original copy of a search and arrest warrant signed by the chief examining magistrate of the Dolisie regional court. The complainant is wanted for illegally wearing a military uniform and possession of a weapon of war. 2.6 In a letter dated 18 December 2009, counsel submitted to the Committee additional evidence that the complainant would be at personal risk if he were to return to the Republic of the Congo. This evidence is an original copy of the Congolese newspaper Maintenant dated 19 November 2009 which includes an account of the harassment by Congolese authorities of certain members of the complainant’s family. The complaint 3.1 The complainant maintains that his forced return to the Republic of the Congo would constitute a violation by the State party of article 3 of the Convention, as there is good reason to believe that he would be at risk of serious harm such as that described in article 1, paragraph 1, of the Convention, due to his continued allegiance to former President Lissouba, now in exile, and his involvement in CERDEC, which was recently established in Switzerland (he is one of the founders of the Swiss branch of the organization). 3.2 The complainant notes that all CERDEC sympathizers and individuals close to the Lissouba family would be at risk of torture and ill-treatment for the purpose of obtaining information and confessions if they were to return to the country. Despite the amnesty signed by the Government in Brazzaville, flagrant human rights violations still occur against members of the opposition who support democracy and social justice. Furthermore, the complainant asserts that new reasons to fear for his safety have emerged since he arrived in Switzerland, in particular a search and arrest warrant issued by the Dolisie Court of Appeal, as well as a warrant for his arrest from the Dolisie regional court. According to the complainant, this evidence establishes a serious and concrete personal risk of psychological and physical torture if he should return to the Congo, particularly given his relationship with the Lissouba family and opposition leader Moungounga Nguila, and the fact that he was a rebel soldier. State party’s observations on admissibility 4.1 In a memo dated 13 November 2009, the State party contested the admissibility of the complaint on the grounds of non-exhaustion of domestic remedies, in accordance with article 22, paragraph 5 (b), and rule 107, paragraph (e), of the Committee’s rules of procedure. 4.2 The State party points out that the complainant appealed the rejection of his request for asylum by the Federal Office for Migration (ODM) on 23 April 2004. On 26 April 2009 the Federal Administrative Tribunal upheld the ODM decision, primarily in view of the lack of credibility of the complainant’s claims. It also found that, regardless of the issue of credibility, the complainant’s fear of future persecution was no longer founded, given the changes that had taken place in his country of origin since his departure. 4.3 The State party emphasizes, however, that in his complaint to the Committee, the complainant asserts that after he left the Congo he became active in CERDEC, an association founded in Paris by members of the opposition in exile, and that he started a Swiss branch. As a result of his activism, particularly as secretary of the Swiss branch of CERDEC, he claimed to have become known in Congolese circles in Switzerland, which led, he says, to the harassment of his close relatives in Brazzaville by Congolese authorities. He claimed to have received threatening phone calls, for which he planned to file a complaint against persons unknown with the Zurich police. The complainant also asserts 4 GE.11-43892