CAT/C/CPV/CO/1 amount of asylum seekers is unknown, since there is no systematic registration and processing of asylum claims at the borders. While noting that asylum seekers would have a right to a judicial review in accordance with Legislative Decree No. 6/97, the Committee regrets that they would not be protected against refoulement during the judicial review process, since the review would not have a suspensive effect on an expulsion order. The Committee also notes with concern that all other undocumented migrants would be subject to an administrative procedure of expulsion, without access to a judicial review (art. 3). 29. The State party should: (a) Adopt the necessary legislative measures to explicitly incorporate into its legislation regulating asylum and expulsion of undocumented migrants the principle of non-refoulement set out in article 3 of the Convention; (b) Promptly establish a national asylum determination procedure that carries out a thorough assessment of the merits of each individual case and a medical and psychological examination when indications of torture or traumatization have been detected among applicants; (c) Set up an asylum registration and screening process at the borders to identify as early as possible victims of torture and trafficking and provide them with immediate rehabilitation and priority access to the asylum determination procedure; (d) Provide for an effective judicial remedy with automatic suspensive effect on the deportation orders of asylum seekers and other undocumented immigrants; (e) Provide information about the number of instances in which the State party has not expelled or extradited persons in danger of being tortured in the country of destination. Jurisdiction over acts of torture 30. The Committee is concerned at the lack of clarity regarding the legal provisions enabling the State party to establish universal jurisdiction over the crime of torture. The Committee also regrets the lack of information, owing to the absence of a State party report, on how the State party has exercised in practice its jurisdiction over cases of torture in compliance with article 5 of the Convention (art. 5). 31. The Committee invites the State party to take all the measures necessary to ensure the exercise of universal jurisdiction over persons responsible for acts of torture. The State party should also provide information to the Committee on instances in which the Convention has been invoked in judicial decisions regarding extradition and universal jurisdiction, in accordance with article 5 of the Convention. Extradition and mutual assistance 32. The Committee regrets the lack of information, owing to the absence of a State party report, on whether the bilateral and multilateral treaties adhered to by the State party made torture an extraditable offence. The Committee also regrets the lack of information on whether the State party relied on diplomatic assurances when extraditing individuals to other States. The Committee further regrets the lack of information on legislation concerning mutual judicial assistance that could apply in the case of the crimes enumerated in article 4 of the Convention (arts. 8 and 9). 33. The State party should provide information on: (a) Whether torture is considered an extraditable offence in the bilateral and multilateral treaties regarding extradition adhered to by the State party; 9