CAT/C/52/D/475/2011 allegations of the complainant’s brother, stating that there were no “concrete evidence or grounds” that he would be subjected to torture, without evaluating or even noting the evidence presented regarding the existence of a pattern of gross, flagrant or mass human rights violations in Uzbekistan and the numerous reports that individuals accused of terrorism and participation in the Andijan events have been routinely subjected to torture. 11.9 The Committee notes the complainant’s allegations that his brother’s former colleagues from the furniture producing enterprise in Uzbekistan had been arrested, subjected to torture during pretrial detention and convicted of terrorism shortly after his brother’s departure for the Russian Federation, and observes that the State party does not address those allegations. The Committee also notes the complainant’s allegation that in the event of forced return to Uzbekistan, his brother might be subjected to reprisals for applying for refugee status in Kazakhstan and lodging a communication before the Committee, and observes that the State party does not refute that allegation. In the context of the case, the Committee concludes that the complainant’s brother, who has been charged with terrorism, interference with the constitutional order of Uzbekistan, illegal establishment of a religious organization, production and dissemination of materials containing a threat to public safety and public order, and establishment of and participation in religious extremist, separatist, fundamentalist or other banned organizations in relation to his alleged participation in the organization of the Andijan events, has sufficiently demonstrated foreseeable, real and personal risk of torture on return to Uzbekistan. Accordingly, the Committee concludes that, in the circumstances of the present case, the State party’s extradition of the complainant’s brother to Uzbekistan would constitute a violation of article 3 of the Convention. 12. The Committee against Torture, acting under article 22, paragraph 7, of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, concludes that the extradition of the complainant’s brother to Uzbekistan would amount to a breach of article 3 of the Convention. 13. Pursuant to rule 118, paragraph 5, of its rules of procedure, the Committee invites the State party to inform it, within 90 days from the date of the transmittal of the present decision, of the steps it has taken in accordance with the above observations. [Adopted in English, French and Spanish, the English text being the original version. Subsequently to be issued also in Arabic, Chinese and Russian as part of the Committee’s annual report to the General Assembly.] 12