CAT/C/48/D/413/2010 the current human rights situation in Burundi, the State party’s migration authorities and the courts established that the prevailing circumstances in that country did not in themselves suffice to establish that the complainant’s forced return to Burundi would entail a violation of article 3 of the Convention. 9.6 The Committee also notes that the State party has drawn attention to numerous inconsistencies and serious contradictions in the complainant’s account of the facts and submissions which call into question her general credibility and the veracity of her claims. The Committee also takes note of the information furnished by the complainant on these points. 9.7 In relation to the complainant’s assertion that she was sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment for aiding murder and theft, acts she claims she did not commit, the Committee notes the State party’s argument that no actual judgement has been submitted by the complainant, only a document titled “proof of service of a judgment”. Further, the State party stated that the documents submitted in support of her claims were of very limited value as evidence, since they were very simple documents which were easy to produce and lacked any kind of case number or other identification. Furthermore, the State party raised questions as to why the complainant would have received the originals of the documents in the court file and not – as is customary – certified copies. The complainant has not refuted these observations, nor has she submitted any evidence to the contrary or additional arguments, even though she was given the opportunity to do so. 9.8 In the light of the foregoing, the Committee finds that the complainant has not established that in case of her expulsion to the country of origin she would face a foreseeable, real and personal risk of being tortured within the meaning of article 3 of the Convention. 10. Accordingly, the Committee against Torture, acting under article 22, paragraph 7, of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, concludes that the complainant’s removal to Burundi by the State party would not constitute a breach of article 3 of the Convention. [Adopted in English, French and Spanish, the English text being the original version. Subsequently to be issued also in Arabic, Chinese and Russian as part of the Committee’s annual report to the General Assembly.] 15