CAT/C/28/D/146/1999 page 8 10. The State party has pointed to inconsistencies in the complainant’s statements, which in its opinion cast doubt on the veracity of her allegations. The Committee reaffirms its jurisprudence that torture victims cannot be expected to recall entirely consistent facts relating to events of extreme trauma. But they must be prepared to advance such evidence as there is in support of such a claim. The political activities that the complainant claims to have carried out since she became a member of the Zwiadists, are not of such a nature as to conclude that she risks being tortured upon her return. Nor does any of the information provided reveal that the complainant risks being subjected to torture because of her husband’s partisan work and execution by the governmental forces. This view is further supported by the fact that the complainant was not the object of interest by Georgian authorities after she was released from detention in 1993, and until she left the country in 1996. In this respect, the Committee does not attach importance to the neighbours’ declaration stating that the complainant was persecuted while residing in Gegetjkori from 1994 to her departure in 1996, since she did not submit this allegation until 29 October 1998, more than two and a half years after she lodged her initial application for asylum. 11. On the basis of the above considerations, the Committee considers that the complainant has not substantiated her claim that she risks being subjected to torture upon return to Georgia. 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 removal of the complainant to Georgia would not constitute a breach of article 3 of the Convention. Notes 1 Complaint No. 65/1997 of 6 May 1998, paragraph 14.5. 2 Complaint No. 106/1998 of 3 June 1999, paragraph 6.5. 3 Complaint No. 38/1995 of 9 May 1997, paragraph 10.5. 4 Complaint No. 112/1998 of 3 June 1999, paragraph 6.4, see similar statement in Seid Mortesa Aemei v. Switzerland Complaint No. 34/1995 of 29 May 1997, paragraph 9.6. 5 Complaint No 90/1997 of 19 May 1998, paragraph 8.3, and Complaint No. 61/1996 of 6 May 1998, paragraph 11.2. 6 Reference is made to Complaint No. 65/1997, paragraph 14.3. 7 Reference is made to Complaint No. 94/1997 of 20 May 1998, K.N. v. Switzerland, paragraph 10.3 and 10.4. 8 Reference is made to Complaint No. 112/1998, paragraph 6.5.