SECOND SECTION

Application no . 9013/13 S. against Switzerland lodged on 31 January 2013

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicants, three Tam il women (mother and daughters) claim to have lived in the so-called “ Vanni region” in Northern Sri Lanka . During the military offensive in 2008 they had to flee their home, were detained and brought to military camps. One applicant alleges to have been mistreated and ( sexually ) harassed by militaries. They have been released from the camps after family members bribed the guards. Following they all left the country and sought for asylum in Switzerland in 2010. Their husband and father is living in Switzerland since 1990. The Federal Office for Migration dismissed the applicants ’ requests for asylum and stated that the applicants ’ stories were lacking credibility and were contradictive. The Federal Office for Migration however considered that an expulsion of the applicants to the region of Vanni was not reasonably safe but that they could relocate around Colombo where they allegedly had family members. This decision was upheld by the Federal Administrative Court .

COMPLAINT S

The applicants claim that they have no social network they could rely on if sent back to Colombo. They fear that they will be obliged to return to their home in Northern Sri Lanka . As three Tamil women living in a female-headed household in the area of Vanni , which is still strongly militarised, they claim to belong to a particular vulnerab le group who are at risk of ill ‑ treatment and (sexual) harassment by the militar y . [1] Their expulsion to Sri Lanka would therefore amount to a breach of Article 3 of the Convention.

They also fear to be at risk of ill-treatment contrary to Article 3 of the Convention because the Sri Lankan authorities, who are well informed about asylum seekers abroad, know that their asylum request s were rejected abroad and that they are not in possession of discharge certificates from the military camps they were detained.

Under Article 8 of the Convention they claim that an expulsion to Sri Lanka would separate them from their husband and father who has been living in Switzerland f or twenty years and is now severely ill.

QUESTION S

1. In the light of the applicant s ’ claims and the documents which have been submitted, would they face a risk of being subjected to treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention if the expulsion order were enforced?

2. By which means did the respondent State clarify whether the uncle is still living in Colombo and willing and able to secure the applicants ’ safety?

[1] See http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/pdfid/50d1a08e2.pdf , p. 33.