CAT/C/53/D/473/2011 ETELAAT viewed him as a politically dangerous person who threatened national security and consequently imprisoned, tortured, prosecuted and punished him based on that belief. As regards their political activities in Switzerland, the complainants dispute the State party’s argument that they are “too low profile” to attract the attention of the Iranian authorities. They submit that Mr. Khademi was persecuted in the Islamic Republic of Iran for his political activities and was an active member of the KDPI, which automatically makes him a high-profile figure in exile. Mr. Khademi, Shahin Qadery and Ramyar Khademi, the first, second and third complainants, are also very active members of the Swiss section of the KDPI; the name Ramyar Khademi appears in many official documents and photos of all three are on the Internet. The complainants argue that, even if their political activities were considered as low profile, they would still risk ill-treatment on return to the Islamic Republic of Iran. 5.3 With regard to the State party’s argument concerning the lack of credibility of the complainants’ accounts, the complainants submit that the State party arrived at that conclusion without finding any major contradictions in their stories and by generally denying all the evidence that they provided to substantiate their claims. The complainants state that they are able to provide additional letters of testimony from other exiled persons who were found to be credible by official asylum bodies of other countries in Europe. Those letters confirm that Mr. Khademi was an active member of the KDPI between 1979 and 1983 and that he was in prison in Kurdistan Province between 1991 and 1993, and later exiled. The complainants state that they are unable to maintain contacts with anyone in the Islamic Republic of Iran to secure additional evidence of Mr. Khademi’s imprisonment. Furthermore, the complainants argue that the minor contradictions mentioned by the State party were already explained in detail during the national procedure and in the complaint itself to the Committee. 5.4 The complainants put forward that, considering their past and current political activities, Mr. Khademi’s conviction in the Islamic Republic of Iran, their illegal departure from that country and their application for asylum in Switzerland, there is a real and imminent risk that they would be subjected to torture or other inhuman and degrading treatment should they be returned to the Islamic Republic of Iran. In the light of the illtreatment already suffered by Mr. Khademi and the credible reports about the frequent use of torture by Iranian security officials, the complainants fear that they would be apprehended and detained upon return, and that they would suffer ill-treatment in prison. Issues and proceedings before the Committee Consideration of admissibility 6.1 Before considering a claim contained in a communication, the Committee must decide whether it is admissible under article 22 of the Convention. The Committee has ascertained, as it is required to do under article 22, paragraph 5 (a), of the Convention, that the same matter has not been and is not being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement. 6.2 The Committee recalls that, in accordance with article 22, paragraph 5 (b), of the Convention, it shall not consider any communication from an individual unless it has ascertained that the individual has exhausted all available domestic remedies. The Committee notes that in the instant case, the State party has recognized that the complainants have exhausted all available domestic remedies. As the Committee finds no further obstacles to admissibility, it declares the communication admissible and proceeds with the consideration of the merits. 11