alleges that he had problems with the authorities. In particular, almost one year after his alleged torture by the army in December 1990, the author left his country for Singapore and returned voluntarily to Sri Lanka; The author travelled many times to Colombo and had no problems with the authorities except in March 1991 and March 1992. This establishes that the author is not suspected of complicity with LTTE; While the author claimed that he was tortured by the authorities when arrested in December 1990, March 1991 and March 1992 he has not provided any evidence to indicate that any pain suffered in March 1991 amounted to torture as defined by the Convention. Also, when last arrested in 1992, the event which is alleged to have prompted him to leave the country, the author was not beaten and was released the next day with the only obligation being to report to the authorities once a week; As to the author's physical condition, his wife stated that, apart from a longer period of questioning because of his speech difficulties, her husband had no other problem with the police when he was in Colombo. The author himself stated that the police were able to understand him when he spoke with them; As to the argument that the author would face torture because of his speech difficulties, the State party argues that this is mere conjecture and is based on the medical report which states that "(s)ome Tamil refugees, whom I have examined, have indicated that they believe that they are at risk in Sri Lanka if they have scars or signs of injury as these could be regarded by the authorities as an indication that their injuries had occurred while fighting with the LTTE". Such beliefs cannot constitute substantial grounds required by article 3 of the Convention; The author's wife has not herself been arrested by the authorities and she had no problem with the police in Sri Lanka. Therefore, there is a total lack of evidence that she was accused or suspected of being an LTTE supporter; Contrary to the author's wife's claim, there is no evidence that her identity card was taken away by the Sri Lanka authorities. In any event, she was not arrested, detained, accused or asked to make any subsequent reports to the police; In 1991, the author, and in 1992, his wife, legally obtained passports in Sri Lanka; The authors have not claimed that persons in their immediate circle, notably family members, were arrested or tortured. 7.10 The State party refers to decisions of the Committee where the authors have failed to show that the danger is personal and present. (5) The State party also refers to a case decided by the European Court of Human Rights involving the removal of Sri Lankans. In that case the allegation of a violation of article 3 of the European Convention on