147. In its decision on complaint No. 212/2002 (Kepa Urra Guridi v. Spain), the Committee found that by pardoning three officers of the Guardia Civil, who had tortured the complainant, and by commuting their one-year prison sentence to a suspension from duty for one month and one day, the State party had violated article 2, paragraph 1 and article 4, paragraph 2, of the Convention. It also found a violation of article 14, paragraph 1, arguing that the obligation to redress acts of torture includes measures such as restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, guarantees of non-repetition, as well as judicial or administrative sanctions against persons liable for acts of torture. 148. In its decision on complaint No. 226/2003 (Tharina Ali v. Sweden), the Committee considered that the complainant had established that her expulsion to Bangladesh would expose her to a risk of being subjected to torture, in violation of article 3 of the Convention, in the light of medical evidence corroborating her uncontested allegation that she had been tortured in the recent past in retaliation for her and her husband’s political activities, as well as the fact that she was still wanted in Bangladesh. 149. In case No. 233/2003 (Ahmed Hussein Mustafa Kamil Agiza v. Sweden), the complainant was expelled to Egypt following a decision by the executive, rather than the judiciary, based on national security grounds. The expulsion was carried out with the assistance of a foreign intelligence service and in the light of diplomatic assurances provided to Sweden by Egypt. A number of allegations of mistreatment emerged after the complainant’s return to Egypt. The Committee found that the immediate expulsion, without giving the complainant an opportunity to have his case reviewed by an independent body, was in breach of article 3 of the Convention. It also found a violation of the complainant’s right to an effective complaint under article 22 of the Convention, as he had been deprived of an opportunity to seize the Committee prior to his expulsion and because the State party had withheld relevant information concerning his allegations of ill-treatment. One Committee member appended a separate opinion to the Committee’s decision. D. Follow-up activities 150. At its twenty-eighth session, in May 2002, the Committee against Torture revised its rules of procedure and established the function of a Rapporteur for follow-up of decisions on complaints submitted under article 22. 151. The Rapporteur on follow-up submitted an oral report to the Committee at its thirty-third session. The report contained information received since the thirty-second session from either the complainants or the States parties on the issue of follow-up to a number of decisions in which the Committee had found violations of the Convention. During the consideration of this report, the Committee requested the Special Rapporteur to provide information on follow-up to all decisions in which the Committee had found violations of the Convention, including decisions in which the Committee found violations, prior to the commencement of the Rapporteur’s mandate. 152. During the thirty-fourth session, the Special Rapporteur presented a report on follow-up to all the Committee’s decisions, including new information received from both the complainants and States parties since the thirty-third session. This report is provided below. 56