CAT/C/53/D/321/2007 11.3 Secondly, the Committee recalls that, pursuant to article 3, paragraph 1, of the Convention, the State party is under an obligation not to expel a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he or she would be in danger of being subjected to torture. In the case at hand, the Committee notes the complainants’ claims that on 23 December 2006 members of the security forces forcibly entered their homes and then took them to a police station, where they remained for several hours. Members of the security forces then bussed them to the Algerian border and left them in the desert, without adequate clothing and without shoes or food, and warned them not to return to Morocco. The Committee further notes that the expulsion was carried out extremely quickly and without notice and that the complainants had no opportunity to challenge their expulsion before the Moroccan authorities as they were not assisted by a lawyer and had not been informed of their right to appeal. The Committee also notes that the complainants were not allowed to speak with the chief of the police station where they were held for several hours so that they could show him the documents issued by UNHCR that attested to their refugee status. The Committee further notes that the border was closed at that time (and remains so to this day) and that the complainants were therefore inevitably exposed to all manner of danger and violence. In effect, according to the complainants’ claims, two women were raped by unknown gunmen, and the Algerian security forces compelled the complainants to return to Moroccan territory by striking them and threatening to shoot them to death. 11.4 The Committee notes that the State party asserts that the administrative authorities issued an expulsion order dated 23 December 2006 in respect of 230 sub-Saharan immigrants in an irregular situation but that this group did not include the complainants and that the investigations undertaken by the authorities in 2014 confirmed that the complainants’ names did not appear in the databases of the UNHCR office in Morocco or the Office of Refugees and Stateless Persons of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation. However, given that, at the time of the initial consideration of their complaint by the Committee, the complainants were on file with the UNHCR office in Morocco and had provided their file numbers to the Committee, the Committee has no reason to doubt the truth of their claims. Consequently, the Committee is of the view that the facts as described by the complainants reveal a failure on the part of the State party’s authorities to assess the risks involved before sending the complainants to a State where they would risk being subjected to torture, in contravention of the principle of non-refoulement, and thus disclose a violation of article 3, paragraph 1, of the Convention, inasmuch as the complainants’ expulsion to Algeria placed them in a situation in which they were in danger of being subjected to torture. 12. The Committee against Torture, acting under article 22, paragraph 7, of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, is of the view that the facts before it disclose a violation of article 3, paragraph 1, of the Convention. 13. In accordance with 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 action it has taken pursuant to the above views. 8 GE.15-00382