CAT/C/NLD/CO/5-6 applicants are assessed for both their capacity to be interviewed properly as well as their eventual needs of treatment and support due to ill-treatment, torture or trauma suffered; (b) To apply the Istanbul Protocol in the asylum procedures and to provide training thereon for concerned professionals to facilitate monitoring, documenting and investigating torture and ill-treatment, focusing on both physical and psychological traces, with a view to providing redress to the victims. Residence permits to asylum seekers 13. The Committee notes with concern the reports by reliable sources on the Government’s intention to change the Aliens Act to abolish article 29, paragraph 1 (c), of the Act providing for residence permit based on humanitarian grounds, leaving discretion to the Government to reflect, for example, on the level of the asylum seeker’s integration into society. This intention is reportedly motivated by the new Government policy to counter the perceived abuse of the law by requiring the asylum seekers to prove the well-founded fear of persecution or real risk of suffering cruel or inhuman treatment. The Committee is also concerned at reports that in the context of such evaluations the Government tends to place emphasis on the fact that if perpetrators of atrocious acts are duly prosecuted in the country of destination, the victims are no longer considered being at risk to be subjected to torture or ill-treatment upon return to that country. This policy may not fully address the psychological conditions of the concerned individual and therefore should not result in a negative decision on asylum and return of the person to his country (art. 3 and 16). The Committee recommends that the State party consider maintaining the provision in article 29(1) (c) of the Aliens Act and ensure that the assessment of well-founded fear take into account, inter alia, previous experience of persecution or serious harm as being seriously indicative of a well-founded fear and whether or not protection against widespread and generalized violence in the country of destination can be provided by either the state or other actors, in accordance with article 3 of the Convention. Detention of asylum seekers and foreigners based on migration law 14. The Committee is concerned at reports that asylum seekers arriving at Amsterdam’s Schiphol airport are systematically detained for average duration of 44 days due to a failure to comply with the necessary visa requirements, which, for example, prompted a hunger strike by 19 detainees on 30 April 2013 and the incidents of suicide in protest against detention. Their grounds for stay are processed according to the Dublin II Regulation procedure and they remain detained until its outcome (arts. 11 and 16). The Committee urges the State party to ensure that the detention of asylum seekers is only used as a last resort, and, where necessary, for as short period as possible and without excessive restrictions, and to effectively establish and apply alternatives to the detention of asylum seekers. 15. The Committee is concerned that the maximum time lime of 18 months for administrative detention of foreign nationals who await expulsion or return to their country of origin, based on article 59 of the Alien Act and article 15 of the EU Return Directive (EU directive 2008/115/EG) is not strictly observed in practice. There have been reports of about 30 per cent of aliens being administratively detained repeatedly for periods longer than 18 months because of apprehensions by the police after the release from their first detention due to absence of valid residence permit. The Committee recommends that the State party: (a) Scrupulously observe the absolute time limit for the administrative detention of foreign nationals, including in the context of repeated detention; 5