CAT/C/71/D/913/2019 established, additional grounds must exist showing that the individual concerned would be personally at risk.1 4.10 Furthermore, the State party recalls the Committee’s jurisprudence to the effect that the burden of proof in cases such as the present one rests with the complainants, who must present an arguable case establishing that they run a foreseeable, present, personal and real risk of being subjected to torture. In addition, the risk of torture must be assessed on grounds that go beyond mere theory or suspicion, although the risk does not have to meet the test of being highly probable.2 4.11 The State party recalls the human rights and security situation in Ingushetia. From 2010 onwards, there has been a steady decline in the number of rebellion-related violent incidents, although they still occur. According to reports from previous years, relatives of suspected rebels run the risk of being arrested and subjected to abuse. There are still reports of disappearances and use of torture in the republics of the North Caucasus.3 4.12 The State party does not wish to underestimate the concerns that may legitimately be expressed with respect to the current human rights situation in Ingushetia in the Russian Federation. However, in the light of the above-mentioned reports, the State party finds no reason to deviate from the domestic migration authorities’ assessment that the prevailing situation there cannot be deemed to be such that there is a general need to protect all asylum seekers from that part of the country. The State party notes that the domestic migration authorities and courts have evaluated the prevailing human rights situation in Ingushetia in the Russian Federation in relation to the complainants’ individual circumstances and found that they have not substantiated their claim that they are in need of international protection. 4.13 In connection with the complainants’ first application for asylum, the Swedish Migration Agency held an extensive asylum investigation with L.H. on 18 January 2010. The investigation was conducted with the aid of an interpreter, whom L.H. confirmed that she understood well. The minutes from the investigation were later communicated to the public counsel, who was appointed on 19 January 2010. A supplementary investigation was held with L.H. on 16 February 2010 in the presence of the public counsel and with the aid of an interpreter. According to the minutes from the investigation, she had some difficulties understanding the interpreter. However, L.H. was subsequently invited to make corrections to and comments on the minutes through her public counsel. Upon appeal, the Migration Court held an oral hearing with her. 4.14 After the complainants had applied for asylum a second time, an asylum investigation was held with L.H. by the Swedish Migration Agency on 6 November 2017 in the presence of her public counsel. An investigation was also held with M.H. in the presence of the public counsel. The minutes from the investigations were subsequently communicated to the public counsel. Both investigations were conducted with the aid of interpreters, whom the complainants’ confirmed that they had understood well. Upon appeal, the Migration Court held an oral hearing with L.H. on 7 September 2018. 4.15 Through their public counsel, the complainants have therefore been invited to scrutinize and submit written observations on the minutes of the interviews conducted and to make written submissions and appeals. It follows from that background information that the complainants have had several opportunities to explain the relevant facts and circumstances 1 2 3 4 For example, E.J.V.M. v. Sweden (CAT/C/31/D/213/2002), para. 8.3; and, for a more recent reference, A.B. v. Sweden (CAT/C/54/D/539/2013), para. 7.3. For example, H.O. v. Sweden, communication No. 178/2001, para. 13; A.R. v. Netherlands (CAT/C/31/D/203/2002), para. 7.3; Kalonzo v. Canada (CAT/C/48/D/343/2008), para. 9.3; and X v. Denmark (CAT/C/53/D/458/2011), para. 9.3. See Finnish Immigration Service, “Current status of the insurgency in North Caucasus and persecution by the authorities”, 2015. Available from https://migri.fi/documents/5202425/5914056/61472_Current_status_of_insurgency_in_the_North_Ca ucasus_and_persecution_by_the_au.pdf/81fb3ef8-652a-4a5b-9478ccfb4b94e08c/61472_Current_status_of_insurgency_in_the_North_Caucasus_and_persecution_by_th e_au.pdf.pdf.