CAT/C/BIH/CO/2-5 domestic violence for law enforcement personnel, judges, lawyers and social workers who are in direct contact with the victims as well as for the public at large. Refoulement 14. Notwithstanding article 91 of the Law on Movement and Stay of Aliens and Asylum with regard to the principle of prohibition of return (CAT/C/BIH/2-5, para. 76), the Committee remains concerned at reports that the competent authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina have failed to properly assess the risk of refoulement faced by those who apply for international protection and that persons considered to be a threat to national security are subject to being expelled or returned to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that they would be in danger of being subjected to torture. It is also concerned at the very low rate of successful asylum applications (art. 3). The State party should: (a) Ensure (i) procedural safeguards against refoulement and (ii) effective remedies with respect to refoulement claims in removal proceedings, including review by an independent judicial body concerning rejections; (b) Ensure that a thorough review of each individual case is provided for asylum claims and that persons whose applications for asylum have been rejected can lodge an effective appeal with the effect of suspending the execution of the decision on the expulsion or deportation; (c) Revise its current procedures and practices in the area of expulsion, refoulement and extradition and align its interpretation of key concepts of domestic asylum law fully with international refugee law and human rights standards; (d) Continue to follow up on and keep the Committee informed of the case of the citizen of Bosnia and Herzegovina who remains in detention in Guantanamo Bay military base; (e) Ensure that national security considerations do not undermine the principle of non-refoulement and that the State party fulfil its obligations to respect the principle of absolute prohibition of torture in all circumstances, in accordance with article 3 of the Convention. 15. With regard to individuals whose citizenship has been revoked by the State Commission for Revision of Decisions on the Naturalization of Foreign Nationals and who consequently are detained in the deportation centre, the Committee takes note of the State party’s report claiming that legal rights to judicial protection had been provided for them. However, noting the concerns expressed by several international bodies, the Committee remains concerned that reported cases on the prolonged detention in inadequate conditions of those individuals and the denial of their right to effectively challenge the decisions to revoke their citizenship, detain and deport them have not been fully clarified (arts. 3 and 16). The State party should revise its practice regarding the prolonged detention of those individuals and fully respect their right to effectively challenge the decisions to revoke their citizenship, detain and deport them. Furthermore, the State party should guarantee key principles related to a fair and efficient asylum procedure, including adequate translation and interpretation services, free legal aid and access of applicants to their case file. 5