CAT/C/71/D/807/2017 she could not recall the exact number of trips that she had made to the Kurdish region. When asked by the employee of the Federal Office for Migration to specify how many trips she had made, X replied that she had made four or five. 5.6 With regard to her arrest, X believes that she was misunderstood. The house was under constant surveillance. X did not claim that her fiancé had escaped, but rather that he had gone out before the officers arrived, for a different reason. This is plausible, as the house had been under surveillance for several days, and the officers had not got out of their vehicle immediately. X had simply made an inference based on her assessment of the facts. 5.7 Furthermore, it is entirely possible that, when blindfolded, X was able to hear her fiancé’s mother fall, as a blindfolded person can hear and recognize the voice of a falling person. The complainants maintain that this fact is not absurd. 5.8 X’s diary was also the subject of controversy. As X stated several times, she wrote her diary by hand, in the first person, and printed out photographs to accompany her account, including photographs of herself and her father from which they could be identified. She had been scanning the diary to her USB stick, which her fiancé had then taken. In fact, he had the USB stick with him when he was arrested. Furthermore, X did not ask for news of her fiancé while she was in Switzerland in order to protect him. She notes that this is very common behaviour among asylum seekers. The only person of whom she asked for news was her father. 5.9 Moreover, the various medical reports submitted by X confirm that she experienced ill-treatment in the Islamic Republic of Iran. As X had never been able to establish a relationship of trust with her first therapist and had experienced suboptimal care, she had not been able to express herself during her hearings as well as she might have because of posttraumatic stress disorder, which continues to affect her. Consequently, X attempted suicide after her second hearing. With regard to the State party’s claim that the causes of X’s posttraumatic stress disorder are different from those that she herself put forward, even though the symptoms of the disorder have been established, X stresses that the State party has not explained the sources of information on which this finding is based. She maintains that the Swiss authorities clearly did not carry out a proper assessment of the facts relating to the complainants, which led to the rejection of their asylum application. 5.10 Lastly, concerning the issue of political activities, or rather political opinion, the Swiss authorities, including the Federal Office for Migration, considered that the complainants’ deliveries of aid to the Kurds were not born of a political commitment. The complainants state that, even though the support that they provided did not result from a political ideal, such support, even when not motivated by a political opinion, is nonetheless considered by the Government to be so motivated. In view of the ever-increasing tensions between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Kurdish minorities, any aid to the Kurds, even if it is neutral, humanitarian and philanthropic, is perceived by the Iranian Government as a betrayal of the homeland and, therefore, as a political activity as well as grounds for persecution, which justifies the granting of refugee status in accordance with contemporary interpretations of international law. The complainants therefore conclude that the Swiss authorities misjudged the facts, which led to a breach of the law. 5.11 On 3 October 2018, the complainants’ counsel, on behalf of the Swiss Red Cross Outpatient Clinic for Victims of Torture and War, in Bern, expressed concern about the planned closure of the sheltered accommodation facility for refugees, where the complainants would be living until the end of October 2018. Their counsel requested that the complainants should not be relocated to alternative sheltered housing, as this would seriously aggravate their medical and psychiatric problems, namely complex trauma and dementia (copies of medical reports were attached). The complainants consider as reasonable and appropriate the suggestion that they be housed in an apartment for persons with disabilities. Additional information from the complainants 6. On 3 May 2021, the complainants submitted a request for information regarding the date on which a final decision would be made and provided an update on their state of health. GE.21-12363 7