H.S. AND OTHERS v. CYPRUS JUDGMENT 5 26. The applicant submitted that he did not receive the decision of the Reviewing Authority but had only heard that his asylum file had been closed. He was therefore not able to appeal. 27. The Government submitted that a letter was sent on 10 May 2010 by double registered mail (registered mail with proof of delivery) to the address given by the applicant. The letter had been returned. They provided a copy of the receipt on which it was noted “insufficient address.” 3. Application no. 41793/10 – F.T. v. Cyprus 28. The applicant, who is a Syrian national of Kurdish origin, was born in 1972 in Syria. 29. In his application form to the Court the applicant submitted that he had converted to Christianity. In 2003 he was detained by the Syrian police and was accused of organising a church congregation (organising people for church). During his detention, which lasted two days, he was tortured by police officers. He did not confess that he had changed religion but told them that he had been going to church to give music lessons. He was arrested again on 12 March 2004 and detained for five days during which he was subjected to torture. After he was released he was told that he would be contacted again. For this reason he started travelling around Syria but never staying in places where too many Kurds lived. 30. The applicant left Syria on an unspecified date in 2005. Although he had left legally, he had bribed a police officer at the border to let him go through. The applicant entered Cyprus illegally after travelling from Turkey. 31. He applied for asylum in Cyprus on 11 May 2005. 32. Following an interview on an unspecified date, his application was dismissed on 16 August 2008 on the ground that he did not fulfil the requirements of the Refugee Law of 2000-2005 (as amended up to 2005; see paragraph 20 above). The Asylum Service held that the applicant’s claims and his alleged fear of persecution on return to Syria were not credible. It noted in this respect that the applicant had been able to obtain a passport lawfully and to leave Syria, that there had been discrepancies between his asylum application and his interview, concerning the grounds for which he had alleged left Syria, and that the applicant lacked basic knowledge of the Christian religion. 33. On 12 September 2006 the applicant lodged an appeal with the Reviewing Authority against the Asylum Service’s decision. 34. It appears that on 17 October 2006 the applicant applied for a temporary residence permit. 35. On 20 March 2007 the decision was upheld and the appeal dismissed. 36. The Reviewing Authority, referring to the Asylum Service’s decision, held that there had been discrepancies in the applicant’s account of