CAT/C/20/D/61/1996 page 8 9.1 In a further letter, counsel for the authors states that he had filed a new application with the Aliens Appeals Board, on the basis of the uncertain new political situation in the former Zaire, 3 and that on 18 June 1997, the Board stopped the execution of the decision to expel the authors. 9.2 By note of 2 February 1998, the State party informed the Committee that the Aliens Appeals Board, on 22 January 1998, rejected the authors' new application. The Board concluded that neither the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, nor the personal situation of the authors entailed any risk of persecution, torture or inhuman or degrading treatment if they were to return. In respect of the political situation in the former Zaire, after the overthrow of the Government of President Mobutu in spring 1997, the Board considered that there existed no general impediments to enforcing decisions of expulsion to the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Moreover, the Board noted that the PRP, the party to which the authors claim to belong, is part of the Alliance of Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Congo-Zaire, led by Mr. Kabila, the new head of State of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. For this reason, the Board found that no personal impediments existed to the enforcement of the decision of expulsion in the authors' case. The State party states that it shares the Board's view. 9.3 By letter of 22 April 1998, counsel for the authors admits that the party to which the authors belong is the party to which the present head of State Kabila, belongs. He argues however that the situation has changed since the authors left their country, and that the authors do not agree with the dictatorship imposed by President Kabila. In this context, he notes that the authors participated in a demonstration in front of the American, English and French embassies to protest against the arrest of Mr. Thsisekedi, the leader of the UDPS. The authors are convinced that the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo are aware of their presence at the demonstration and that they will risk torture if they were to return. In this context, they also submit that their father was an active supporter of ex-president Mobuto and that they speak Lingala, a language associated with President Mobutu supporters. Further, they claim to risk ill treatment because they are not in the possession of identification documents. Issues and proceedings before the Committee 10. Before considering any claims contained in a communication, the Committee against Torture must decide whether or not it is admissible under article 22 of the Convention. The Committee has ascertained, as it is required to do under article 22, paragraph 5 (a), of the Convention, that the same matter has not been and is not being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement. The Committee finds that no further obstacles to the admissibility of the communication exist and proceeds with the consideration of the merits of the communication. 11.1 The Committee must decide, pursuant to paragraph 1 of article 3, whether there are substantial grounds for believing that the authors would be in danger of being subject to torture upon return to the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In reaching this decision, the Committee must take into account all relevant considerations, pursuant to paragraph 2 of article 3, including the existence of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of