CAT/C/48/D/364/2008 country with the help of a “white female” in July 2005; and that they applied for asylum on 22 August 2005. Lastly, the Committee notes the complainant’s claim that he faces a real risk of being persecuted because of his Rwandan origins (regardless of whether he is a Hutu or Tutsi), given that ethnic tensions persist in Kinshasa and that the upcoming presidential elections cannot but exacerbate the situation. 8.7 The Committee notes the State party’s argument that the evidence adduced by the complainant in support of his communication before the Committee provides insufficient evidence to challenge the decisions handed down by the Swiss authorities following a thorough examination of the case. The Committee further notes the State party’s argument that, according to the investigation conducted by the Swiss embassy in Kinshasa, there is no ethnic conflict nor are particular ethnic groups being persecuted in Kinshasa, the city where the complainant and his children were living prior to their departure; that the complainant and his children are of Rwandan Hutu rather than Tutsi origin; and that therefore the claims that they make on the basis of their ethnic origin are not credible. 8.8 In the light of the information provided by the parties, the Committee finds that the complainant has not substantiated a causal link between the events that ostensibly led him and his children to leave their country of origin and the risk of torture that they would face if deported to the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The complainant has in fact provided the Committee with very little information about the treatment he allegedly suffered, particularly with regard to the events in Kinshasa in 1998, and it was only by referring to the decisions issued by the national authorities that the Committee was able to piece together the allegations put forward by the complainant and his children. Lastly, the Committee is of the view that the information on possible ethnic tensions in the complainant’s country of origin is of a general nature and does not indicate the presence of any foreseeable, real and personal risk of torture. 8.9 Taking into account all the information made available to it, the Committee considers that the complainant has failed to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that he or either of his children would face a foreseeable, real and personal risk of being subjected to torture if deported to their country of origin. 9. The Committee against Torture, acting under article 22, paragraph 7, of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, therefore concludes that the return of the complainant and his children to the Democratic Republic of the Congo would not constitute a breach of article 3 of the Convention. [Adopted in English, French, Russian and Spanish, the French text being the original version. Subsequently to be issued also in Arabic and Chinese as part of the Committee’s annual report to the General Assembly.] 10 GE.12-43679