CAT/C/46/D/338/2008 demanded to give exact and detailed account of everything that has taken place, as it was not humanly possible. 5.5 As to the general situation in Bangladesh he submits that the situation has developed even further, namely the Awami League has won the election in December last year, however he points out that BNP has still a power and the opponents of BNP are still being subjected to persecution. Issues and proceedings before the Committee Consideration of admissibility 6.1 Before considering any claim contained in a communication, the Committee against Torture must decide whether or not it is admissible under article 22 of the Convention. The Committee has ascertained, as it is required to do under article 22, paragraph 5 (a), of the Convention, that the same matter has not been, and is not being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement. 6.2 In accordance with article 22, paragraph 5 (b), of the Convention, the Committee does not consider any complaint, unless it has ascertained that the complainant has exhausted all available domestic remedies. The Committee notes the State party’s acknowledgment that domestic remedies have been exhausted and thus finds that the complainant has complied with the requirements in article 22, paragraph 5 (b). 6.3 The Committee notes that no arguments or evidence have been submitted in substantiation of the claim under article 16 of the Convention, and therefore the Committee concludes that this claim has not been substantiated for the purposes of admissibility. This part of the communication is thus inadmissible. 6.4 On the alleged violation of article 3, the Committee is of the opinion that the arguments before it raise substantive issues, which should be dealt with on the merits and not on admissibility alone. Accordingly, the Committee finds this part of the communication admissible and proceeds to its consideration. Consideration of merits 7.1 The Committee must determine whether the forced return of the complainant to Bangladesh would violate the State party's obligations under article 3, paragraph 1, of the Convention not to expel or return ('refouler') an individual to another State, where there are substantial grounds for believing that he or she would be in danger of being subjected to torture. 7.2 The Committee must decide, pursuant to paragraph 1 of article 3, whether there are substantial grounds for believing that the complainant would be in danger of being subjected to torture upon return to Bangladesh. In reaching this decision, the Committee must take into account all relevant considerations, pursuant to article 3, paragraph 2, including the existence of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights. In this regard, the Committee notes that the State party acknowledged that the general human rights situation in Bangladesh has worsened and that torture, beating and other forms of abuse are used by the police while interrogating suspects. 7.3. The aim of the present determination, however, is to establish whether the complainant would be personally at risk of being subjected to torture in Bangladesh after his return. A consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights in Bangladesh, would not as such constitute sufficient grounds for determining that he would 9