CAT/C/70/D/915/2019 7.4 The Committee recalls that it is for the courts of the States parties to the Convention, and not for the Committee, to evaluate the facts and evidence in a particular case, unless it can be ascertained that the manner in which such facts and evidence were evaluated was clearly arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice. 25 In light of the foregoing, and in the absence of any further information or explanations of relevance on file, the Committee finds that the complainant has not shown that the decisions taken by the State party’s authorities suffered from any such defects. 7.5 The Committee recalls that, for a claim to be admissible under article 22 of the Convention and rule 113 (b) of its rules of procedure, it must not be manifestly unfounded. In light of the above, and in the absence of any further relevant information, the Committee concludes that the complainant has failed to sufficiently substantiate his claims for the purpose of admissibility. In light of this conclusion, the Committee decides not to examine any other inadmissibility ground as invoked by the State party. 8. The Committee therefore decides: (a) That the complaint is inadmissible under article 22 (2) of the Convention and rule 113 (b) of its rules of procedure; (b) State party. 25 That the present decision shall be communicated to the complainant and to the G.K. v. Switzerland (CAT/C/30/D/219/2002), para. 6.12. 9