CAT/C/53/D/489/2012 7.6 The Committee notes that the complainant has been an active member of ADR in Switzerland since 2006, and, as such, his name is listed in the monthly magazine Kanoun produced by the organization; that he has attended the meetings of the executive committee, has been responsible for the recruitment of new members in his canton and has regularly visited asylum centres. He has participated on stands, and in campaigns and demonstrations against the Iranian regime and his photograph has appeared on the Internet. The State party has not contested that information. The Committee notes the State party’s observation that the Iranian authorities target high-profile individuals that could represent a specific danger to the Iranian regime, and that ADR is active mainly in Switzerland and that its activities are not known abroad. However, the Committee observes that the complainant’s work in ADR was not limited merely to participation in demonstrations or to administrative tasks, but placed him among the leadership of an organization publicly opposing the regime in Iran. The Committee observes moreover that recent reports indicate that even low-level opposition is closely monitored in Iran 13 and that the Iranian authorities effectively monitor internet communications and regime critics both within and outside of Iran.14 7.7 In the light of all the above circumstances, including the general human rights situation in Iran, the personal situation of the complainant, who has continued his active engagement in political activities against the Iranian regime abroad and bearing in mind its previous jurisprudence,15 the Committee is of the opinion that the complainant may well have attracted the attention of the Iranian authorities. The Committee therefore considers that there are substantial grounds for believing that the complainant would risk being subjected to torture if returned to Iran. Moreover, the Committee notes that, since Iran is not a party to the Convention, in the event of a violation of the complainant’s Convention rights in Iran, he would be deprived of the legal option of recourse to the Committee for protection of any kind. 8. The Committee against Torture, acting under article 22, paragraph 7, of the Convention, concludes that the deportation of the complainant to Iran would constitute a violation of article 3 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. 9. Pursuant to rule 118, paragraph 5, of its rules of procedure, the Committee urges the State party to inform it, within 90 days from the date of the transmittal of this decision, of the steps it has taken in response to the decision expressed above. 13 14 15 8 See A/HRC/25/61 (see footnote 11), paras. 88–90; A/68/503 (see footnote 11), paras. 6–15. S.F. and others v. Sweden (see footnote 6). See the Committee’s communications No. 339/2008, Amini v. Denmark, decision adopted on 15 November 2010, para. 9.8, No. 357/2008 Jahani v. Switzerland (see footnote 11), para. 9.4, No. 381/2009, Faragollah et al. v. Switzerland (see footnote 11), para. 9.6.