CAT/C/46/D/310/2007 been in prison in Sweden and by telling the immigration police upon arrival at Damascus airport that he had killed someone in Sweden. 4.9 In addition, the State party submits that the complainant has never applied for political asylum in Sweden and that it was not until he applied for revocation of the expulsion order in 1993 and in 1996 that he claimed to have a well-founded fear of being tortured on return to Syria and/or Lebanon, without providing any medical certificates or other evidence in support of his claim. 4.10 As regards the pending expulsion order, the State party challenges that any restrictions were imposed on the complainant after finishing his military service in Syria. Had he failed to report to the security service despite an order to do so, he would now be wanted and his name would be registered in a special database for in- and outward journeys. However, there was no indication that he was wanted, required to report to the security service or to apply for special permission to leave his hometown, or prohibited from holding state employment. Such restrictions would have been registered by the Syrian authorities. According to information received on 16 March 2005 from the Swedish Embassy in Damascus, no arrest warrant had been issued against the complainant in Syria. While it was likely that the security service would summon him for several years, the Embassy could not confirm that he was prohibited from leaving Syria. In the absence of any evidence, the complainant had failed to substantiate that he was wanted by, or otherwise of interest to, the Syrian security service. 4.11 The State party does not contest that the complainant was tortured in the past, as confirmed by the medical records of the Centre for Treatment of Crisis and Trauma Victims. However, from those records, it was not possible to draw any conclusions about when and where he had been tortured. The State party reiterates that it cannot be excluded that the torture took place before 1997, when he was captured by enemy forces in Lebanon in 1989, and that some of the scar formations result from war injuries. Moreover, it was not until August 2004, i.e. one year after his arrival in Sweden, that he went to see a doctor, and not until his application dated 23 November 2004 for revocation of the expulsion order that he claimed to have been subjected to torture in Syria in 1997. 4.12 The State party argues that, having served his prison term and having performed his military service, the complainant was no longer in default vis-à-vis the Syrian State. It was unlikely that he would still be considered a security risk by the Syrian authorities, given that the judgment of the Supreme State Security Court concerned acts dating back to the 1980s, and that he had apparently not been engaged in anti-Syrian activities in the recent past. 4.13 The State party concludes that the enforcement of the expulsion order in 1997 was not in violation of article 3 of the Convention; nor would the enforcement of the pending expulsion order against the complainant constitute a violation of that article. Complainant’s comments on the State party’s observations 5.1 On 13 December 2007, the complainant commented on the State party’s observations: On the facts, he submits that he was granted residence in Sweden in 1990 due to his marriage with Fehima Melki. In the 1980s, he lived in Lebanon where he joined one of the armed fractions of the Lebanese Forces. A military superior helped him to leave Lebanon for Cyprus, where he lodged an application for a resident permit at the Swedish diplomatic representation. 5.2 The complainant submits that the reason why he concealed his Syrian nationality and first told the Swedish authorities that he was born in Beirut, where he pretended his parents and siblings were living, was that for obtaining a resident permit, it was more 9