to serious harm can also be found in Art. 3 ECHR. For protection from expulsion from countries of the Council of Europe, the victim of trafficking would need to demonstrate that there are “substantial grounds […] for believing that the person in question, if expelled, would face a real risk of being subjected to treatment contrary to Art 3 [ECHR] in the receiving country”. 127 Currently, it is not possible to state how the ECtHR would assess a challenge of deportation of a trafficked person under Art. 3 ECHR, but in light of the ECtHR’s previous interpretations of treatment which are contrary to Art. 3 ECHR it can be assumed that trafficking in human beings would fall within the scope.128 At the level of the European Union, DIR 2004/83/EC defines which criteria a person has to fulfil in order to be able to receive “subsidiary protection”. 129 The terms ‘subsidiary protection’ or ‘complementary protection’ describe protection granted by States on the basis of an international protection need outside the framework of the Refugee Convention. It may be based on a human rights treaty and is a form of protection triggered by non-refoulement obligations of States.130 In general this directive shows the same protections and requirements of the Refugee Convention, but includes the fact that the well-founded fear of persecution is not required to be the result of any of the five reasons of the Refugee Convention (race, religion, nationality, membership of particular social group or political opinion).131 4.1.5 Dangers from Non-State Actors Can dangers such as re-trafficking or retaliation by traffickers also lead to the protection of non-refoulement? UNCAT requires in its definition of torture a public element and the scope of Art. 3 UNCAT is limited to torture. Consequently UNCAT requires that the persecution is linked to a governmental authority. Torture by private actors per se does not fall within the scope of Art. 3 UNCAT.132 Threats of torture by private actors without the Case of Ahmed v. Austria , Columbia Journal of Transnational Law consent or acquiescence of the State party fall outside the scope of Art. 3 UNCAT and do not lead to prohibition of refoulement.133 Nevertheless, torture by private actors can be attributable to States in case the State is unable to protect the person adequately. The State would then conduct torture by acquiescence. If States may be seen as having acquiesced to torture, then Art. 3 UNCAT and the protection from refoulement would also be applicable to acts by private actors.134 Consequently, it could be argued that expelling States not only have to assess the risk emanating from the States to which the person should be returned to, but also whether the latter States are able to provide effective protection against the risk posed by non-State actors.135 The protection obligations under Art. 3 ECHR are also applicable when the danger emanates from persons or groups of persons who are not public officials. In Ahmed v. Austria the ECtHR found a violation of Art. 3 ECHR because the deported person faced significant risk of ill-treatment or death at the hands of non-State actors, even though the deportation was claimed to be necessary for national security.136 In case the danger originates from non-State actors, it is crucial to assess the availability and quality of protection offered by the country of origin of the trafficked person. It has to be shown that the risk is real and the country of origin is not able or willing to protect the trafficked person from this risk.137 Trafficked persons face the risk of being re-trafficked. A victim can be found by the traffickers upon their return and forced to reimburse a certain amount of money. If the trafficked person escapes before the target earnings set by the traffickers was reached, the traffickers may try to force the person to continue earning. The harm of being re-trafficked reaches the threshold of Art.3 ECHR and can amount to torture or other forms of ill-treatment. The threat of being re-trafficked has to be individually assessed. The mere possibility of re-trafficking is not sufficient. Retaliation of traffickers can also amount to torture or other forms of ill-treatment, therefore retaliation can trigger the 133 A Commentary The United Nations Convention against Torture: 134 International Journal of Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 on Minimum Standards for the Qualification and Status of Third Country Nationals or Stateless Persons as Refugees or as Persons who Otherwise Need International Protection and the Content of the Protection Granted Complementary Protection in International Refugee Law 131 Refugee Law, Göttingen Journal of International Law, ase of T.I. v. the United Kingdom, 31