CAT/C/48/D/364/2008 8.3 In assessing the allegations made by the complainant on his own and his children’s behalf under article 3, the Committee must take account of all relevant considerations, including the existence of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights in the State concerned. The aim of such an assessment, however, is to determine whether the complainant would personally be in danger of being subjected to torture in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. It follows that the existence in that country of a pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights does not in itself constitute sufficient grounds for determining that a particular person would be in danger of being subjected to torture if deported to that country. Additional grounds must be adduced to show that the individuals concerned would be personally at risk.4 8.4 The Committee recalls its general comment No. 1 (1996) on the implementation of article 3 of the Convention in the context of article 22, which states that, while the risk of torture does not have to meet the test of being highly probable, it must be personal and present. In this regard, the Committee has established in previous decisions that the risk of torture must be “foreseeable, real and personal”.5 As to the burden of proof, the Committee recalls that it is generally incumbent upon the complainant to present an arguable case and that the risk of torture must be assessed on grounds that go beyond mere theory or suspicion. 8.5 The Committee is aware of the dire human rights situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.6 However, it also notes the doubts expressed by the State party as to the credibility of the allegations made by the complainant and his children since their first asylum applications were lodged on 2 July 2003 and 22 August 2005, respectively. 8.6 In assessing the risk of torture in the case under consideration, the Committee notes the complainant’s claims that, starting in 1998, he suffered ill-treatment at the hands of students, neighbours and State agents because of his Rwandan Tutsi origins. The Committee notes that, during the asylum proceedings, the complainant explained that on or around 10 November 1998 he was taken to the home of Laurent-Désiré Kabila, whence he managed to escape after spending one week in captivity; that the complainant then fled to Bunia in the east of the country; that he was then allegedly abducted by militiamen on 5 May 2003 and held in a mud hut; that he again escaped and fled the country; and that he travelled to Kenya, then to Italy and finally to Switzerland, where he applied for asylum on 2 July 2003. The Committee notes the complainant’s claims that his children were themselves persecuted in Kinshasa because of their origins, which led them to leave the 4 5 6 GE.12-43679 See S.P.A. v. Canada, communication No. 282/2005, decision adopted on 7 November 2006; T.I. v. Canada, communication No. 333/2007, decision adopted on 15 November 2010; and A.M.A. v. Switzerland, communication No. 344/2008, decision adopted on 12 November 2010. See A.R. v. The Netherlands, communication No. 203/2002, decision adopted on 14 November 2003, para. 7.3; A.A. et al. v. Switzerland, communication No. 285/2006, decision adopted on 10 November 2008, para. 7.6; and R.T.N. v. Switzerland, communication No. 350/2008, decision adopted on 3 June 2011, para. 8.4. See, inter alia, the report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the situation of human rights and the activities of her Office in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (A/HRC/16/27); report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (S/2011/20); the Committee’s concluding observations on the report submitted by the Democratic Republic of the Congo under the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT/C/DRC/CO/1); the concluding observations of the Human Rights Committee on the report submitted by the State party under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR/C/COD/CO/3); and “Technical assistance and capacity-building. Combined report of seven thematic special procedures on technical assistance to the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and urgent examination of the situation in the east of the country” (A/HRC/10/59). 9