CAT/C/20/D/61/1996 page 7 submitted which shows that their alleged political activities render them a target of the Zairian authorities at this point in time. An enforcement of the expulsion order against the author would therefore not constitute a violation of article 3 of the Convention. Counsel’s comments 8.1 In his comments on the State party's submission, counsel for the authors states that the political situation in Zaire is very difficult at present, since different groups are fighting each other and the Government has lost control of great parts of the country. According to counsel, people returning from abroad risk arrest and torture upon arrival. 8.2 With reference to the jurisprudence of the European Commission of Human Rights, counsel states that the possibility of lodging a new application with the Aliens Appeals Board does not affect the admissibility of the communication. 8.3 As to the merits, counsel submits that a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights exists in Zaire. He adds that the authors are at personal risk of being tortured if returned to Zaire. In this context, counsel claims that the political party to which X and Z belong is still forbidden in Zaire. Counsel states that the changes made in the political structure in Zaire make it very difficult to predict the danger of their return. 8.4 Regarding Y, counsel points out that she has been tortured and submits that if one of her torturers were to see her again, he may kill her or torture her to prevent her from telling what earlier had happened to her. 8.5 Regarding the UNHCR information, counsel states that he has been told by UNHCR representatives that this information is not consistent with the policy of the UNHCR central office and should thus not be used. 8.6 Counsel argues that the Immigration Board and the Aliens Appeals Board do not examine the real reasons for a person to seek asylum, but only look into the question of credibility. 8.7 Regarding the State party's argument that the authors have provided different and contradictory information, counsel claims that they have never been given an opportunity to give a full statement, which explains the discrepancies. Counsel further argues that even if some information is inconsistent, the important question is whether they will be at risk of being treated in violation of the Convention against Torture when returned to Zaire. 8.8 Concerning the lack of medical evidence for X and states that, since no one questioned the fact that they was not necessary to provide medical evidence. Medical sister was only provided, because she suffered from the torture so much that she had to see a specialist. his wife, counsel had been tortured, it evidence for the consequences of the