CAT/C/55/D/530/2012 4.8 The State party submits that, while it does not underestimate the concerns that may legitimately be expressed with regard to the current human rights situation in Belarus, in particular regarding political opponents, these are not, in themselves, sufficient to establish that the expulsion of the complainants would entail a violation of article 3 of the Convention. Therefore, the State party contends that the removal of the complainants to Belarus would only entail a breach of the Convention if they could show that they would be personally at risk of being subjected to treatment contrary to article 3. However, in the present case, the complainants have failed to substantiate their claims that they would run such a risk. 4.9 The State party adds that several provisions in the Swedish Aliens Act reflect the same principles as those laid down in article 3 of the Convention. Thus, the Swedish migration authorities apply the same kind of test when considering an application for asylum under the Aliens Act as the one applied by the Committee when examining subsequent complaints under the Convention. The fact that such a test has been applied in the present case is indicated by the reference of the Swedish authorities in their decisions relating to the present case to sections 1, 2 and 2 (a) of chapter 4 of the Aliens Act. Furthermore, regarding the complainants’ requests for re-examination of their applications for residence permits, according to sections 1-3 of chapter 12 of the Aliens Act, which have been considered, the expulsion may never be enforced to a country where there are reasonable grounds to assume that the alien would be in danger of being subjected, inter alia, to torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment or to a country where the alien is not protected from being sent on to a country in which the alien would be at such risk. 4.10 The State party adds that its national authorities are in a very good position to assess the information submitted by an asylum seekers and to appraise the credibility of their claims. In the present case, the Migration Board and the Migration Court undertook thorough examination of the complainants’ case. When they applied for asylum, the Migration Board conducted individual interviews with both of them. The interviews lasted almost five hours for the first complainant and almost two hours for the second complainant. The purpose of these interviews was to give the complainants an opportunity to explain the reasons for their need for protection and explain all the facts relevant to the Migration Board’s assessment. Both interviews were conducted in the presence of an interpreter, whom the complainants confirmed that they understood well. Furthermore, the complainants have argued their case in writing before the Migration Board and the migration courts. Throughout the proceedings regarding the complainants’ initial asylum request, they were represented by a public counsel. Since the decision ordering the expulsion of the complainants gained legal force, the Migration Board has on four occasions reviewed new circumstances invoked by the complainants. On one of these occasions, the decision of the Migration Board was appealed, but was not overturned by the Migration Court. Against this background, the State party holds that it must be considered that the Migration Board and the migration courts had sufficient information, together with the facts and documentation in the case, to ensure that they had a solid basis for making a well-informed, transparent and reasonable risk assessment of the complainants’ need for protection in Sweden. 4.11 In this connection, the State party recalls the Committee’s general comment No. 1 (1997) on the implementation of article 3 of the Convention, as well as its jurisprudence, where it is stated that the Committee is not an appellate, quasi-judicial or an administrative 10 s-rapporter-om-manskliga-rattigheter/europa-och-centralasien?c=Vitryssland. Available from www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2012humanrightsreport/index.htm?year=2012&dlid=204263#wrapper. 7