CAT/C/58/D/627/2014 4.12 Further, the State party, as do its migration authorities, finds that the asylum account invoked by the complainant before the domestic authorities was vague, lacking in detail and, in some respects, even contradictory. He acknowledged shortcomings in various aspects of his asylum account before the Committee, even though he tried to be very clear in describing his activities during the asylum proceedings. He has, however, held that those shortcomings may be owing to interpretation problems, or that the asylum officer did not properly take notes of his account. He has furthermore stated that he and his counsel have not done a full review of the minutes from the asylum interview. In that regard, the State party reiterates that the complainant has had the opportunity to explain the relevant facts and circumstances in support of his claim and to argue his case during the domestic proceedings, orally as well as in writing, and that during the interviews he had access to a public counsel and a qualified interpreter. Following the asylum interview, the complainant confirmed that he had invoked all the reasons for seeking protection. In addition, the complainant and his counsel have also had the opportunity to review and submit observations and comments on the minutes from the interview. 4.13 The State party further points out that to substantiate his identity, the complainant submitted his national passport, a birth certificate, a population register certificate, a certificate of marital status and a certificate from the population register concerning his family situation. It notes that the national passport submitted was issued by the Embassy of Bangladesh in Rome after he had been in contact with the Bangladesh Consulate in Greece. According to the complainant, he presented a population register certificate in connection with his application at the Consulate in Greece that was procured with the help of his father. Therefore, the complainant did not have any contact himself with the authorities in his country of origin to get the documents issued. In that connection, the State party notes that the Migration Agency found that the population register certificate that formed the basis of the passport application was deemed to be of a “simple nature”. In addition, the Migration Agency made reference to information from the Embassy of Sweden in Dhaka according to which forged legal documents, such as birth certificates and other documents, are common in Bangladesh. Further, the other documents that the complainant submitted to support his identity were also deemed to be of a “simple nature” and could not plausibly demonstrate the complainant’s identity. In that context, the State party agrees with the finding of the Migration Agency that the complainant has failed to plausibly “demonstrate his identity”. 4.14 During his asylum proceedings, the complainant submitted a new passport, issued on 11 September 2013 by the Embassy of Bangladesh in Stockholm. It is clear from the investigation in the case that the new passport was issued on the basis of the old passport. In that regard, the State party, as along with the Migration Court, notes that the new passport could not plausibly “demonstrate the complainant’s identity” either, as the previous passport had not plausibly demonstrated his identity. This was owing to doubts about the documents on the basis of which the passport was issued and the appearance and authenticity of the passport. Nor had the complainant been able to plausibly “demonstrate his identity” on the basis of other documents submitted by him. In addition, the State party notes that that the complainant has on several occasions contacted the authorities in his country of origin and had matters dealt with, in particular, concerning the issuance of the passport. Those circumstances indicate that the complainant does not feel a well-founded fear of being subjected to treatment by the authorities, constituting grounds for protection, and also that he would not be of interest to the authorities. 4.15 According to the complainant’s own account, he has, since he was young, been politically and religiously active in the Islamic party Jamaat-e-Islami and its student organization Islami Chatra Shibir. During the domestic asylum proceedings, he submitted a membership document of Jamaat-e-Islami in order to substantiate his need for protection. Furthermore, he held that he was kidnapped in March 2005 from outside his shop by unknown masked people who took him to an isolated area, where he was subjected to 7