CAT/C/47/D/312/2007 persecution, torture or ill-treatment upon his return to the Islamic Republic of Iran. In that regard, the State party reiterates the views adopted by the Norwegian Immigration Appeals Board as well as the Norwegian Immigration Authorities, that although the working conditions for journalists and other media representatives in Iran are poor, the complainant had not generated journalistic activities of a nature or scope that could be deemed to draw the continued attention of the authorities, and place him at personal and foreseeable risk. The State party argues that the journalistic activities conducted by the complainant, even after his arrival in Norway, do not constitute the type of activities that would be subject to monitoring by the Iranian authorities, since the latter are primarily preoccupied with monitoring activities by Iranians in exile that may pose a concrete risk to the regime. 4.5 Regarding the complainant’s allegation that he was sentenced in absentia to five years’ imprisonment by the Revolutionary Court in Tehran, and that consequently, he would be likely to be imprisoned and tortured if he were returned to the Islamic Republic of Iran, the State party submits that the court documents provided by the complainant to support his case were found to be false by the Norwegian Embassy in Tehran. The verification of the documents was conducted by the Norwegian Embassy, and the verification report was submitted to the complainant through his counsel at the time, for comment. The State party notes that the complainant challenged the verification report, maintaining the authenticity of the court documents. Nevertheless, the authorities found that the complainant did not present any substantial arguments to doubt the verification. The State party considers the essential documents in the case to be false; consequently it questions the credibility and reliability of the complainant’s submissions in their entirety. 4.6 By letter dated 2 December 2008, the State party informed the Committee that on 5 November 2008, the Norwegian Immigration Appeals Board rejected the complainant’s request for reopening of the case, dated 2 January 2007, on the basis that no new information had been put forward to warrant a different assessment from the Board’s assessment in its previous decisions. The State party further informed the Committee that the complainant was registered with an address in Norway as from 20 November 2007, and was therefore no longer in hiding. Author’s submissions 5.1 On 18 April 2009, the complainant sought to refute the observations submitted by the State party. He argues that the court documents presented in support of his asylum application are authentic, and that the State party did not give due regard to the submissions presented by his previous counsel on the authenticity of the documents. 5.2 The complainant also submits further documentation of his activities as a journalist both in the Islamic Republic of Iran and Norway, including Internet and newspaper articles that he had written on the subject of religion and politics in Iran, and signed by him using his real name. The complainant argues that the content and nature of his writing and the ideology represented therein would be considered sufficiently grave for the Iranian authorities to persecute, imprison and torture a person. He recalls that two of his weblogs were closed and blocked by the Iranian authorities after he fled to Norway. 5.3 Finally, the complainant draws attention to the current increasingly grave human rights situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran, with particular focus on the arrest, torture and killing of journalists, bloggers and persons engaged in political activism and criticism of the Government. According to the complainant, the current situation in Iran would undoubtedly lead to his persecution if he were returned to the country. 5