relevant requirements have recently been relaxed, the State party submits that domestic remedies have not been exhausted in the present case. 5. By submission of 10 November 1995, counsel claims that a "new application" under chapter 2, section 5, of the Aliens Act would not be successful. In this connection, she points out that an application has to be based on new circumstances not previously considered and that only 5 per cent of "new applications" succeed. Since the author’s request for asylum was refused on the basis that the situation in Zaire had improved, she argues that a "new application" on the basis of the new medical evidence would be rejected on the same grounds. 6. Before considering any claim in a communication, the Committee against Torture must decide whether or not it is admissible under article 22 of the Convention. 7. Article 22, paragraph 5 (b), of the Convention precludes the Committee from considering any communication, unless it has ascertained that all available domestic remedies have been exhausted; this rule does not apply if it is established that the application of domestic remedies has been or would be unreasonably prolonged or would be unlikely to bring effective relief. In the circumstances of the instant case, the Committee considers that the Swedish domestic authorities should have an opportunity to evaluate the new evidence submitted by the author, before the Committee examines the communication. Moreover, on the basis of the information available, the Committee cannot conclude that the available remedy of a "new application" would be a priori ineffective. 8. The Committee therefore decides: (a) That the communication is inadmissible; (b) That this decision shall be communicated to the State party, to the author and to her counsel. [Done in English, French, Russian and Spanish, the English text being the original version.] -61-