CAT/C/20/D/89/1997 page 8 are no longer any new circumstances to be presented, which is a prerequisite for the Aliens Appeal Board to examine a new application. All domestic remedies have thus been exhausted. 5.2. In the instant case, counsel recalls, the Swedish immigration authorities have not directly questioned the fact that the author has been politically involved with the Freedom Movement in Iran and that he was imprisoned for one month without trial, nor do they seem to question his father’s political background. The Swedish authorities build their decisions entirely on the basis of an arbitrary assessment of the general trustworthiness of the authors. According to counsel, the arguments used by the authorities to turn down the author’s claim for asylum are stereotyped and found in almost every rejection decision. Any inconsistencies or contradictions found in the author’s story are thereafter used to support the authorities a priori judgement that the author is not credible, although complete accuracy is seldom to be expected by victims of torture. 5.3. Counsel points out that the main argument of the immigration authorities is that the author is not trustworthy because he has: (a) left Iran with a valid passport; (b) obtained a legal exit visa; and (c) legally extended the validity of his passport. She also points out that the author has given a credible and consistent explanation of how he used bribes and the influence of a personal contact in the security force in order to be able to leave with a valid passport. The explanation was rejected by the immigration authorities as not credible, although a report from a visit to Iran made in 1993 by representatives from the Aliens Appeal Board 3 shows that, according to the Iranian lawyer normally engaged by the Swedish Embassy in Tehran, it is difficult but nevertheless possible to bribe yourself out of Iran, in the way suggested by the author. 5.4. Counsel further contends that the author has presented reasonable explanations as to how he was able to acquire original documents (a copy of a detention order) intended for internal communication between the Iranian authorities. According to the author he contacted friends in Iran who managed to get the document in question by bribes, and the information thus provided by the author corresponds with information previously given by the Iranian lawyer entrusted by the Swedish Embassy in Tehran. The author has further also given a detailed account of the communication route used in order to distribute politically sensitive material to Iran. 5.5. Counsel concludes that the author has presented sufficient evidence that he was politically active in Nezat Azadi (the Freedom Movement) in Iran and is well known to the Iranian authorities; that he has been detained, tortured and ill-treated due to his political activities; that he has also been politically active against the Iranian regime after his arrival in Sweden and finally that the human rights situation in Iran is deplorable and that political activists are in great danger of persecution. She therefore claims that the author’s return to Iran would have the foreseeable and necessary consequence of exposing him to a real risk of being detained and tortured.