CAT/C/39/D/299/2006 Page 6 5.2 The complainant notes that his asylum request was not rejected on the grounds of insufficient evidence on the alleged acts of ill-treatment suffered in the Democratic Republic of the Congo but because he failed to provide his travel documents within 48 hours since the request had been filed. He insists that his complaint was never examined in substance by national immigration authorities. 5.3 With regard to his alleged lack of credibility, the complainant notes that the interrogations at the Registry Centre serve the purpose of registering asylum seekers and informing them on the procedure to follow. Therefore, interrogation records have little evidentiary value in examining the asylum request. He adds that, even though he was interrogated in a “rudimentary manner” on his grounds for asylum, his declarations were sufficiently precise, detailed and coherent to prove that he was persecuted in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. As to his alleged lack of knowledge of the structure of UDPS, he claims that from the interrogation record it transpires that he understood that he was being asked about the current structure, to which he replied that he could not possibly know as he had been in prison for a year. He notes that the ODR staff should have dissipated this misunderstanding. He adds that, contrary to the State party’s submission, the interrogation records show that he had a sufficient knowledge of the political situation of his country. 5.4 The complainant notes that the State party does not indicate the information sources on which it relies to question the validity of the documents submitted to immigration authorities. He adds that the State party failed to comply with its obligation to thoroughly investigate the complainant’s political activities on the ground and that the argument according to which any of these documents can be “bought” in the Democratic Republic of the Congo is not substantiated. 5.5 The complainant notes that the State party does no longer question his identity or the fact that he obtained a degree in journalism and that he worked for the opposition journal Elima. He recalls that journalists in the Democratic Republic of the Congo are particularly exposed to human rights violations. 5.6 Finally, he explains that he has been presented in many articles by Amnesty International and other organizations as a political opponent that had been imprisoned in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and that this fact alone would be sufficient to put him at risk of torture if returned to this country. Issues and proceedings before the Committee 6.1 Before considering any claims contained in a complaint, the Committee against Torture must decide whether or not 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. The Committee further notes that domestic remedies have been exhausted and that the State party does not contest admissibility. Accordingly, the Committee finds the complaint admissible and proceeds to its consideration on the merits.