CAT/C/34/D/220/2002 Page 11 place,that the complainant’s alleged level of responsibility in the Bangladesh Freedom Party was low and his participation was at the local level only. In addition, it observes that the complainant has provided no evidence, documentary or otherwise, either to the State party or to the Committee, to demonstrate that he had been convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for murder. In fact, it is clear from the judgment provided by the State party on 22 April 2005 that the complainant’s name is not among those convicted. For these reasons, and considering the fact that the government has changed since the alleged torture, the Committee considers that the complainant has failed to show that substantial grounds exist, to prove that he would be at a real and personal risk of being subjected to torture if removed from Sweden. 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, considers that the complainant has not substantiated his claim that he would be subjected to torture upon return to Bangladesh and therefore concludes that the complainant’s removal to that country would not constitute a breach by the State party of article 3 of the Convention. ----[Adopted in English, French, Russian and Spanish, the English 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.]