CAT/C/78/D/1047/2021 3.4 The complainant also asserts that his conversion was examined during the oral hearing in the Migration Court. The hearing lasted, in total, for about two hours and 45 minutes, including initial presentations and the pleadings by the parties towards the end. During this time, he was also examined regarding the other grounds of his asylum request, relating to the abuse he had suffered in Afghanistan. Due to interpretation, the time for questioning was cut in half. He submits that he was given between 30 and 40 minutes to speak in total on all his asylum grounds. Thus, he claims that the oral hearing was evidently not sufficient to thoroughly examine an individual’s deep religious thoughts and beliefs. This contention also appears in the public counsel’s appeal to the Migration Court of Appeal, in which the public counsel states that the complainant said during the oral hearing in the Migration Court that he had more to say about his Christian faith but that, due to a lack of time, he was not given sufficient opportunity to speak about it. 3.5 In support of his arguments, the complainant refers to the case of Q.A. v. Sweden,7 in which the Human Rights Committee found that the Swedish migration authorities had assessed the grounds for protection separately, not jointly, and that the combined grounds aggravated the risk for the author and created multiple vulnerability profiles. The Committee found that Sweden had failed to take into due consideration the consequences of the author’s personal situation in his country of origin and concluded that his removal to Afghanistan would constitute a violation of articles 6 and 7 of the Covenant. 3.6 The complainant considers that it would not be possible to hide his Christian faith in Afghanistan. He has the right to religious freedom and to practise his religion openly, alone or in community with others. In fact, international law prohibits State authorities from expecting religious practitioners to hide their beliefs. The judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the cases of F.G. v. Sweden8 and A.A. v. Switzerland9 make it very clear that one should not be obliged to hide one’s faith or practise it “discreetly”. 3.7 The complainant submits that the authorities have an obligation to investigate, even when finding that a conversion is not sincere, if there are risks associated with the complainant’s activities and behaviour. However, the Swedish authorities have not fully investigated the risk associated with the complainant’s apostasy. 10 In that context, the complainant submits that his conversion is known among his friends, one of whom lives in Kabul, and that he took part in online church activities during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Furthermore, the complainant was a leader at a Christian-themed sports event in August 2020, and a photo from the event was published on the All Star Mission’s Instagram account. The apostasy would be difficult or impossible to hide when the complainant refused to attend the mosque or participate in the Islamic prayers and fasting. In addition, his grandfather would not accept that one of his grandchildren was not taking part in Islamic practices. 3.8 Finally, the complainant refers to the general human rights situation in Afghanistan. In 2020, the World Watch List of the Open Doors organization ranked Afghanistan the second worst out of the 50 countries in which the persecution of Christians is most extreme.11 Less than 0.3 per cent of the population confess to holding a different belief than Islam in Afghanistan. 12 The Christian minority consists mostly of individual Afghans who have converted to Christianity. 13 Christians in Afghanistan stay hidden because of a fear of 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 4 Human Rights Committee, Q.A. v. Sweden (CCPR/C/127/D/3070/2017), paras. 9.6 and 9.8. European Court of Human Rights, F.G. v. Sweden, Application No. 43611/11, Judgment, 23 March 2016. European Court of Human Rights, A.A. v. Switzerland, Application No. 32218/17, Judgment, 5 November 2019. See Human Rights Committee, Q.A. v. Sweden. Open Doors, World Watch List 2020 Advocacy Report, available at https://webuat.opendoorsuk.org/persecution/wwl20-advocacy-report. United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, 2017 Annual Report (Washington, D.C., United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, 2017), pp. 120–123. Swedish Migration Agency, Center for Country Information and Country Analysis in the Field of Migration, “Afghanistan: Kristna, apostater och ateister” (Afghanistan: Christians, apostates and atheists) Thematic Report (version 1.0), 21 December 2017, p. 6. GE.23-24373