CAT/C/65/D/801/2017 4.4 The State party notes that the complainant states that he is possibly being sought by the authorities and that he refers to publicly available information that indicates that torture still takes place at police stations on a large scale. The State party notes that it does not doubt that the complainant has been a member of the opposition party Republic since 2009. However, it argues that this fact alone does not constitute sufficient grounds for assuming that if he were returned to Armenia he would be in danger of being subjected to treatment in violation of article 3 of the Convention. It notes that, according to various country reports, it cannot be deduced that any member of an opposition party, including Republic, who takes part in demonstrations has a reason to fear treatment contrary to article 3 of the Convention.3 The State party submits that the complainant has failed to substantiate his fear of a breach of article 3 of the Convention with specific, individual facts and circumstances. 4.5 The State party notes that the complainant also refers to the problems he claims to have had in the past with his manager and the Armenian authorities, and that he would therefore be unable to obtain protection from the authorities upon return to Armenia. It notes that he also claims that the investigation carried out by the Dutch authorities in Armenia to gather information for the person-specific report could lead to problems for him if he returned. The State party submits that these claims lack credibility. The State party notes that the person-specific report drawn up on 10 February 2012 in response to the investigation carried out in Armenia by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs includes the following findings: (a) the complainant was not detained in Yerevan at any time from 15 to 20 October 2010 or from 9 to 12 November 2010; (b) the complainant was not detained at the police station in Ashtarak at any time from 29 November 2010 to 10 January 2011 or from 2 to 24 February 2011; (c) the complainant did not lodge a criminal complaint against his manager on 13 January 2011; (d) the complainant worked as a driver at a government office and was reported to have resigned from his job on 1 April 2011; (e) the complainant is not being sought by the Armenian authorities; (f) the complainant was issued with an Armenian passport on 12 March 2001 and 11 March 2011. 4.6 The State party notes that it attaches great importance to the general country reports issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and person-specific reports, which are based on thorough investigations. It notes that such reports draw on a range of reports by other organizations, such as the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the United States Department of State, the British Home Office and Human Rights Watch. Person-specific reports are researched with the assistance of the Dutch diplomatic missions in the countries concerned. In investigating information and documents submitted by asylum seekers, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs enlists the services of confidential agents, who are carefully screened for objectivity and reliability on the basis of information supplied by institutions such as non-governmental organizations (NGOs), international organizations, such as the International Organization for Migration, and third-country embassies that can make impartial, informed assessments. Confidential agents must satisfy exceptionally high requirements: they must be discreet and meticulous and have extensive networks and access to sources of information. The use of confidential agents protects asylum seekers and their relatives by ensuring that no one in their country of origin associates them with the Netherlands. Confidential agents receive instructions before they begin their investigation and their findings are discussed in meticulous detail when they report back to the embassy. The investigation is carefully organized in such a way that the authorities are never made aware of the identity of the person in question so as to ensure that the investigation does not cause any problems for that person in their country of origin. The State party submits that there is no credence to the statement by the complainant that the investigation by the Dutch authorities in Armenia would cause problems for him if he were to return. 4.7 The State party notes that its authorities rely on the information in a person-specific report, as long as there are no specific reasons to doubt its accuracy or completeness and provided that the report conveys the information impartially, objectively and clearly and indicates the sources of the information insofar as it is possible and responsible to do so. There is also a small unit of specialized staff at the Immigration and Naturalization Service 3 4 Ibid.