CAT/C/49/D/437/2010 4.3 On the issue of admissibility, the State party notes that it is not aware that the matter has been or is being subject to another procedure of international investigation or settlement. The State party acknowledges that, strictly speaking, all available domestic remedies have been exhausted. However, as according to chapter 12, section 22, paragraph 1, of the 2005 Aliens Act the decision to expel the complainant will become statute-barred on 24 October 2012, the complainant will have the possibility of submitting a new application for asylum and a residence permit, which would entail a full examination of the grounds invoked and be subject to appeal. Therefore, after 24 October 2012, in the light of the alternative remedy still available, it may be said that not all domestic remedies would have been exhausted. In addition to that, the State party submits, in accordance with article 22, paragraph 2, of the Convention, the complainant’s claims that he is at risk of being treated in a manner that would amount to a breach of the Convention is not sufficiently substantiated. The State party concludes, therefore, that the communication is manifestly ill-founded. 4.4 On the merits, the State party notes that despite legitimate concerns that may be expressed with regard to the human rights situation in Algeria, 1 the circumstances do not suffice to establish that the expulsion of the complainant would entail a violation of article 3 of the Convention. The complainant needs to show that he would be personally at risk of being subjected to treatment contrary to article 1 of the Convention. On the complainant’s personal risk of being subjected to torture in Algeria, the State party submits that: (a) the Migration Board made its decision after having held two interviews with him; and (b) the Migration Court held an oral hearing before delivering its decision. It also notes that the domestic legislation contains the same principles as the Convention and that therefore its migration authorities apply the same test as the Committee to establish whether the complainant would be at a foreseeable, real and personal risk of torture if he was expelled to Algeria. It therefore underlines that great weight must be given to the assessment on the ground made by the State party’s migration authorities. 4.5 In support of the complainant’s claim that the Algerian authorities consider him to be a terrorist and that he has been sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment with forced labour, the complainant submitted summonses and a judgment of 12 January 2008; in support of his claim that he risks being killed by terrorists, the complainant submitted statements made to the police by his father after the terrorists searched for the complainant at his father’s house. The Migration Board and Migration Court both questioned the authenticity of the supporting documentation. They noted that the summonses and statements to the police are copies of simple documents and the certified copy of the judgement had different coloured pixels in all stamps, and came to the conclusion that they are neither original nor of probative weight. In addition, the State party requested an assessment of the certified copy of the judgement by its embassy in Algeria, which commissioned an experienced lawyer to assess the authenticity. The assessment showed that the judgement was forged, as many expressions were missing, the usual phraseology in criminal matters was absent, the name of the accused did not appear in the list of the members of the court and no reference was made to the application of the Attorney General, the article of the Penal Code was incomplete, the expression in absentia did not appear, and forced labour is never specified in a sentence. The State party therefore maintains that there has been no judgement as such pronounced against the complainant at all. 1 4 See for example Amnesty International’s annual report on Algeria for 2011; Human Rights Watch, World Report 2011; United States Department of State, “Country reports on human rights practices – Algeria” (8 April 2011), the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Home Office, Algeria: Country of Origin Information Report (14 March 2011); and the report on human rights in Algeria for 2010, published by the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs in July 2011.