CAT/C/59/D/649/2015 identified as terrorists in Sri Lanka”. The individual also claimed that he was released after relatives paid a ransom and that his mental and physical health has been severely impacted. The complaint 3. The complainant submits that, should he be returned to Sri Lanka, he would be detained upon arrival, interrogated (since he had left Sri Lanka illegally), charged and held on remand for offences relating to his illegal departure. He claims that he is at real risk of being tortured and of suffering cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment at the hands of the Sri Lankan authorities. Conditions in the Negombo remand unit have been well documented: the unit is cramped, unsanitary and unhygienic, it provides little chance to exercise and it is overcrowded to the extent that prisoners have to take turns to sleep; the complainant submits that this alone constitutes degrading treatment regardless of the length of time spent there on remand. The complainant therefore maintains that his return to Sri Lanka would constitute a violation of article 3 of the Convention. State party’s observations on admissibility and the merits 4.1 In a communication dated 12 October 2015, the State party submits that the complainant’s allegations are inadmissible on the ground that they are manifestly unfounded pursuant to rule 113 (b) of the Committee’s rules of procedure. Should the Committee find that the allegations are admissible, the State party submits that the claims are without merit, as they have not been supported by evidence indicating that there are substantial grounds for believing that the complainant is in danger of being tortured, as defined by article 1 of the Convention. 4.2 The State party maintains that, pursuant to article 3 of the Convention, States parties have an obligation to not return a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that the person would be in danger of being subjected to torture.2 The Committee’s views in G.R.B. v. Sweden confirm that the obligation under article 3 must be interpreted in reference to the definition of torture set out in article 1 of the Convention. 3 Under the definition of torture contained in article 1, several elements must exist for an act to constitute torture: (a) the act must cause a person severe pain or suffering, whether mental or physical; (b) the act must be intentionally inflicted for such purposes as obtaining information or a confession, inflicting punishment for an act committed or suspected of having been committed, and intimidating or coercing, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind; and (c) the act must be inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.4 Each case must be assessed on its own facts. Whether an alleged act amounts to torture depends on its nature. The obligation of non-refoulement under article 3 of the Convention is confined to torture and does not extend to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.5 If it is established that the alleged acts would constitute torture, article 3 also requires that there exist substantial grounds for believing that the complainant would be in danger of being subjected to torture. That is, the complainant must be at a foreseeable, real and personal risk of being subjected to torture. The Committee has stated that the danger must be personal and present. 6 In order to show that a State party would be in breach of its non-refoulement obligations under article 3 of the Convention, an individual must be found to be personally at risk of such treatment should he or she be returned. The existence of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights in a 2 3 4 5 6 See also communication No. 39/1996, Páez v. Sweden, Views adopted on 28 April 1997, para 4.5. See communication No. 83/1997, G.R.B. v. Sweden, Views adopted on 15 May 1998, para. 6.5. Committee against Torture, general comment No. 1 (1997) on the implementation of article 3, para. 3. Ibid., para. 1. Ibid., para. 7. 3