CAT/C/64/D/680/2015 15.7 The Committee refers to its general comment No. 4, according to which the burden of proof is upon the author of the communication, who has to present an arguable case (para. 38). In the Committee’s opinion, in the present case, the complainant has not discharged this burden of proof. Furthermore, the complainant has not demonstrated that the authorities of the State party, in this case, Australia, failed to conduct a proper investigation into his allegations. 16. The Committee therefore concludes that the complainant has not adduced sufficient grounds to enable it to believe that he would run a real, foreseeable, personal and present risk of being subjected to torture upon return to Pakistan. 17. The Committee, acting under article 22 (7) of the Convention, concludes that the complainant’s removal to Pakistan by the State party would not constitute a breach of article 3 of the Convention. 11