CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 26 octobre 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 26 October 2018   THIRD SECTION Application no. 58572/14 N.K. against the Netherlands lodged on 21 August 2014 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant is a rejected asylum-seeker from Sudan. He is of Nuba origin, was born in South Kordofan and moved to Khartoum as a young child. He claims to be a member of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), a Sudanese opposition movement, and that he has been active for this movement both in Sudan and in the Netherlands. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES In the light of the applicant’s claims and the documents which have been submitted, would he – given the Court’s findings in A.A. v. Switzerland (no.   58802/12, 7 January 2014), A.A. v. France (no. 18039/11, §§ 52-62, 15   January 2015), and A.I. v. Switzerland (no. 23378/15, 30 May 2017) ‑ face a real risk of being subjected to treatment in breach of Article   3 of the Convention if removed to Sudan?