CAT/C/78/D/1047/2021 that he had been subjected to in his home country and the internal conflict he felt because of this. The President of the Court also considered that the complainant had shown good knowledge of Christianity, including its theology and holidays. The evidence submitted and the testimony of a church leader during the hearing supported the complainant’s claim of genuine conversion. Thus, the President of the Court, who was the only legally trained member of the Court who examined the case, found that the complainant was genuine in his Christian conviction, that he intended to live as a Christian convert upon his return to Afghanistan and that, therefore, he would suffer persecution upon his return. 2.7 Despite those arguments, the Migration Court assessed that the time between the complainant’s first visit to the Pentecostal church in Jönköping in the fall of 2018 and his baptism in March 2019 had been too short for the complainant to have genuinely converted. According to the Court, the short time interval indicated that there had been no spiritual or mental process that had led to the conversion. The complainant questions whether the Court arrived at these conclusions on the basis of objective considerations. 6 The complainant submits that his interest in other religions arose when he studied religion in school. He had already started to attend Bible studies and church services in the fall of 2018. Thus, his interest in Christianity had grown over a period of at least six months. There had therefore been enough time for a mental and spiritual process, which had resulted in the formal conversion of the complainant through baptism in March 2019. 2.8 The complainant was ordered to leave Sweden within four weeks from the date on which the decision of the Migration Agency became enforceable, on 1 July 2020. He was ordered by the Migration Agency to obtain temporary travel documents from the Embassy of Afghanistan in Stockholm no later than 28 August 2020. Considering the risks and previous serious violations of his rights, the complainant has remained in Sweden, at immediate risk of deportation by the police. On 27 October 2020, the Migration Agency decided to issue a re-entry ban against the complainant. 2.9 The complainant claims that he has exhausted all available domestic remedies and that the same matter has not been or is not pending under any other mechanism of international investigation or settlement. Complaint 3.1 The complainant claims to face a risk of torture and the death penalty if deported to Afghanistan, in violation of his rights under articles 2 and 3 of the Convention, since he was abused by members of the Taliban in the past, his family has been persecuted and he has converted to Christianity. As regards his allegations of past abuse as a child by members of the Taliban, he claims that the national asylum authorities have not thoroughly investigated the risks of a possible recurrence of persecution against him, if returned. He further submits that his conversion, in combination with the security situation in Afghanistan, the personal risk to him in a Taliban-ruled area due to his Hazara ethnicity and origin and threats against him by family members due to his conversion, constitute a substantial risk to his life and health if he is removed to Afghanistan. 3.2 The complainant also submits that, in accordance with country of origin information, internal relocation is not an option, considering the extreme risk of religion-based persecution across the whole country. He adds that the fact that a presiding judge of the Migration Court produced a dissenting opinion, namely, that the complainant had been able to reason about several core principles of Christianity, makes it clear that his conversion was genuine. 3.3 The complainant further submits that, since the Migration Court did not refer his case to the Migration Agency, he had no real and effective legal means to appeal the assessment of the risks associated with his Christian convictions. Thus, there are major procedural deficiencies in his case, as well as in other conversion cases in general, within the Swedish legal system. 6 GE.23-24373 Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status under the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees, paras. 71–73. 3