CAT/C/52/D/455/2011 are easy to obtain in certain countries. Lastly, the complainant chose to submit that document in 2011. Given the foregoing, the State party concludes that there are serious concerns about the genuineness of the document. 4.6 It submits that even if the document is genuine, there is no evidence that the injury to the complainant’s finger was intentional or aimed at obtaining information about Tien Tao practitioners nor that the injury was due to torture, as defined under article 1 of the Convention. 4.7 Concerning the complainant’s claim that during her visit to China, L.D.Z. had encountered harassment from the police about her relationship with the complainant, that claim was considered by the Immigration Department in May 2010 and found not to be credible as there was no evidence that the complainant was of interest to the Chinese authorities due to her religious beliefs. Despite the presumed senior role of L.D.Z. in the Tien Tao religion, the fact that she was able to enter and leave China without being subjected to torture indicates that the complainant, who does not hold a prominent role in the religion, would not risk being subjected to torture if deported to China. 4.8 The State party claims that the complainant’s communication to the Committee does not contain any new information that was not examined during the domestic processes. The RRT considered and rejected her claim regarding persecution in China for practicing Tien Tao. It was not convinced that she had been persecuted, and it felt that her engagement in Tien Tao activities in Sydney was made solely for the purpose of strengthening her application before the Immigration Department. The Federal Court and the High Court upheld the decision of the RRT as no error of law was found. The State party recalls the Committee’s practice not to question the evaluation of the evidence made in domestic processes. 4.9 The State party concludes that the complainant’s claims that she would be at risk of torture if returned to China were found not credible by the Immigration Department and that there has been no material change in the complainant’s circumstances since her last application for ministerial intervention in March 2011. Accordingly, in the absence of any credible evidence that the complainant would be at risk of torture, her deportation to China would not be in breach of article 3 of the Convention, and thus her claims should be dismissed for lack of merits. 4.10 On 28 February 2013, the State party provided the Committee with general information on the domestic processes it undertakes in assuming its non-refoulement obligations. It submits that in 2011 to 2012, it granted 7,083 protection visas to applicants in Australia; each applicant is carefully assessed in a robust determination process in line with Australian international protection obligations. 4.11 In 2012, new legislation came into force that provides additional protection in connection with Australia’s non-refoulement obligations. The examination of a protection visa application consists of the following: first instance consideration by officers of the Immigration Department; review of the merits by the RRT; judicial review by Australian courts, including the Federal Magistrate Court, the Federal Court and the High Court. Finally, should the applicant not be successful in obtaining a protection visa, application for ministerial intervention may be pursued, whereby the Minister for Migration may intervene in favour of the applicant, if public interest so requires. 4.12 If after exhausting all domestic processes, Australia’s protection obligation is not engaged, domestic law requires the removal of the person concerned from Australia as soon as reasonably practicable, and the person concerned is notified accordingly. Before facilitating the return of the person concerned, the State party undertakes a final preremoval clearance process, in which it verifies that no new information has emerged that would engage its international protection obligation. The Office of the United Nations High 5