The Committee recommends that the State party should consider introducing a procedure that distinguishes between asylum applications based on article 3 of the Convention and other applications, with a view to ensuring absolute protection for anyone at risk of being tortured if he or she is returned to a third State. In this regard, the Committee also recommends that the situations covered by article 3 of the Convention should be the subject of a more thorough risk assessment in accordance with the provisions of article 3, including by systematically holding individual interviews to better assess the personal risk to the applicant, and by providing free interpretation services. (7) While noting that, following the entry into force of the Act of 30 June 2000, a decision on the refoulement of a person (refusal of admission) may be the subject of an interim suspension order or an interim injunction, the Committee is concerned that these procedures are non-suspensive, in that “the decision to refuse entry may be enforced ex officio by the administration” after the appeal has been filed but before the judge has taken a decision on the suspension of the removal order (art. 3). The Committee reiterates its recommendation (A/53/44, para. 145) that a refoulement decision (refusal of admission) that entails a removal order should be open to a suspensive appeal that takes effect the moment the appeal is filed. The Committee also recommends that the State party should take the necessary measures to ensure that individuals subject to a removal order have access to all existing remedies, including referral of their case to the Committee against Torture under article 22 of the Convention. (8) The Committee is concerned that, since the entry into force of the Act of 26 November 2003, any person who has been returned (refused admission) is no longer automatically entitled to one clear day before the decision is enforced, but has to expressly request one, failing which he or she can be removed immediately (art. 3). The Committee recommends that the State party should take the necessary measures to ensure that persons who have been returned (refused admission) are automatically entitled to a clear day and are informed of this right in a language they understand. (9) The Committee is also concerned about the new provisions in the Act of 10 December 2003 that introduce the concepts of “internal asylum” and “safe country of origin”, which do not guarantee a person absolute protection against the risk of being returned to a State where he or she might be tortured. The Committee wonders why the State party, in incorporating into its domestic legislation the Framework Decision of the Council of the European Union on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between member States (No. 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002), failed to incorporate the thirteenth preambular paragraph, which stipulates that “[n]o person should be removed, expelled or extradited to a State where there is a serious risk that he or she would be subjected to the death penalty, torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment” (art. 3). The Committee recommends that the State party should take appropriate measures to ensure that applications for asylum by persons from States to which the concepts of “internal asylum” or “safe country of origin” apply are examined with due consideration for the applicant’s personal situation and in full conformity with articles 3 and 22 of the Convention. The Committee also recommends that the State party should take the necessary legislative measures to incorporate in the Act of 9 March 2004, on adapting the justice system to developments in the field of crime, a provision stipulating that no person can be returned, expelled or extradited to a State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he or she would be in danger of being subjected to torture. (10) While noting the restraint shown by the police during the wave of unrest in many French cities which necessitated police mobilization to control the riots, the Committee is deeply concerned about the statements by the Minister of the Interior calling on prefects to order the immediate expulsion of persons convicted during the riots, regardless of their administrative status. The Committee fears that action taken in response to this statement could have a discriminatory effect by the very fact that it would target not only foreign nationals without proper papers but also 26