CAT/C/20/D/89/1997 page 7 authorities and his sister had subsequently been interrogated and imprisoned. The application was turned down by the Board, noting that in the light of the Board’s knowledge of anti-governmental activities in Iran and distribution of politically sensitive material in Iran, it was not deemed credible that the author would expose himself and his sister of such a risk by using a personal communication route for distribution of the mentioned materials into Iran. 4.11. Finally, on 25 July 1997, the Aliens Appeal Board examined a third new application lodged by the author, where he invoked an examination report by the Center for Torture and Trauma Survivors according to which the author without any doubt had been subjected to torture and according to which there was good concordance between the forensic medical investigation; the patient’s allegations and the very clinical picture of PTSD found at the investigation. The application was turned down by the Board, since the matter of the author’s imprisonment and his alleged torture in that connection had previously been reviewed by the Board. Already in its initial decision of 7 February 1996 the Aliens Appeal Board stated that “(i)n view of the author’s lack of credibility in the above-mentioned respect, the Board does not consider that it has cause to give credence to his statement that his injuries occurred as a result of physical abuse or torture”. 4.12. The State party draws the attention of the Committee to the main elements in the author’s story which give rise to doubts as to the credibility of the author. Firstly, the author travelled to Sweden from Iran with a genuine and valid passport. Taking into account that, after his arrest by the Iranian authorities, the author was released after a month without facing trial, and that his father’s political activities were already known by the authorities at the time of the author’s arrest, the Swedish Board of Immigration and the Aliens Appeal Board questioned the author’s credibility as to the statement that bribes were used to enable him to leave Iran. Subsequently, there is no reason to believe that the author is of particular interest to the Iranian authorities. Secondly, in his appeal to the Aliens Appeals Board, the author invoked, among others, internal correspondence between Iranian authorities regarding a warrant of his arrest. The State party submits that the author has not been able to give any reasonable explanation as to how he was able to acquire original documents which were clearly intended for internal purposes. Further, there is nothing to support the author’s claim that he has distributed politically sensitive material to Iran. Finally, it should be noted that the author did not request asylum until almost two weeks after his arrival in Sweden, thus indicating that he is not in any immediate need of protection. 4.13. The State party concludes that, in the circumstances of the present case, the author’s return to Iran would not have the foreseeable and necessary consequence of exposing him to a real risk of torture. An enforcement of the expulsion order against the author would therefore not constitute a violation of article 3 of the Convention. Counsel’s comments 5.1. In her comments on the State party’s submission, counsel for the author draws the attention to the Committee to the fact that the author has already lodged three so-called new applications with the Aliens Appeal Board. There