CAT/C/53/D/473/2011 injuries and the alleged ill-treatment suffered in the Islamic Republic of Iran had been established. The Committee, however, observes that the medical certificate states that Mr. Khademi’s medical condition “fits the description of the ill-treatment described.” 7.6 Consequently, and in the light of the general human rights situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran that particularly affects members of the opposition, and in view of Mr. Khademi’s political opposition activities in both the Islamic Republic of Iran and Switzerland, his previous imprisonment and history of torture, the Committee considers that there are substantial grounds for believing that Mr. Khademi, the first complainant, risks being subjected to torture if returned to the Islamic Republic of Iran. 7.7 As for the cases of Shahin Qadery, Mr. Khademi’s wife and the second complainant, and of Zanyar Khademi, Mazyar Khademi and Kamyar Khademi, Mr. Khademi’s children and the fourth, fifth and sixth complainants, which are dependent upon his case, the Committee does not find it necessary to consider them separately. As regards Ramyar Khademi, the third complainant, who was not a minor at the time the family lodged their first asylum applications in Switzerland and whose case was initially assessed separately by the Swiss asylum authorities, the Committee notes that the Federal Administrative Tribunal merged his asylum application with that of his family upon appeal. The Committee, like the State party, thus considered his case jointly with that of the Khademi family, based on the facts presented by Mr. Khademi. 8 The Committee against Torture, acting under article 22, paragraph 7, of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, concludes that there are substantial grounds for believing that Hussein Khademi would face a foreseeable, real and personal risk of being subjected to torture by government officials if returned to the Islamic Republic of Iran. The Committee therefore concludes that the deportation of the complainants to the Islamic Republic of Iran would amount to a breach of article 3 of the Convention. 9. The Committee is of the view that the State party has an obligation to refrain from forcibly returning the complainants to the Islamic Republic of Iran or to any other country where they run a real risk of being expelled or returned to the Islamic Republic of Iran. Pursuant to rule 118, paragraph 5, of its rules of procedure, the Committee invites the State party to inform it, within 90 days from the date of the transmittal of this decision, of the steps taken in response to the present decision. 13