CAT/C/52/D/466/2011 4.3 The State party explains in detail the applicable domestic asylum law and its international obligations, such as the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (the Refugee Convention), the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It further describes the organization and decision-making process of the Refugee Appeals Board. It notes, in particular, that the Board is an independent quasi-judicial body, composed of two judges and other members, such as attorneys or employees of the Ministry of Justice, who do not serve in the secretariat of the Board; the Board members are independent and cannot accept or seek directions from the appointing or nominating authority. The decisions of the Board are not subject to appeal. Although an appeal can be brought before the domestic courts under the Danish Constitution, it is limited to legal issues and does not allow for a review of the assessment of evidence. The State party further submits that, as is normally the case, the complainant was assigned a legal counsel, and they both had an opportunity to study the case file and the background material before the meeting of the Board. The hearing was also attended by an interpreter and a representative of the Danish Immigration Service. The Board conducted a comprehensive and thorough examination of all evidence in the case. 4.4 Furthermore, when the Danish immigration authorities decide on applications for asylum, they assess the human rights situation in the receiving country, as well as the risk of individual persecution in that country. Therefore, the complainant is using the Committee only as an appellate body, to obtain a new assessment of his claim, which has already been thoroughly considered by the Danish immigration authorities. With reference to paragraph 9 of the Committee’s general comment No. 1 (1997) on the implementation of article 3 of the Convention in the context of article 22,12 the State party submits that the Committee is rather a monitoring body and should give considerable weight to findings made by the Danish authorities, in particular its Appeals Board. 4.5 As to whether there are substantial grounds for believing that the complainant would be personally at risk of being subjected to torture in Turkey, the State party refers to the Appeals Board decisions of 8 November 2002 and 28 June 2006 in their entirety. It reiterates the reasons underlying the Board’s finding that the complainant failed to substantiate the existence of such a risk, in particular, that he had made contradictory statements about his political work and places of residence; that he had failed to substantiate the risk that he would be subjected to disproportionate punishment because of his failure to complete military service; and that he had been able to live under his own name, to get a driving licence and to enter and leave Turkey freely after his release on parole in 1991. 4.6 The State party challenges the credibility of the complainant’s statements and underlines the following inconsistencies. First, the complainant stated to the Romanian authorities that he had gone to Greece after his release in 1991 and returned to Turkey in 1992, whereas he submitted to the Danish authorities that he had gone to the Adana area in Turkey after his release. When confronted with those inconsistencies, the complainant replied that he did not consider them important. Second, regarding his political activities after his release, he stated before the Appeals Board in 2002 that he had been a PRK representative but had not recruited new members, whereas in 2006 he stated that he had recruited new party members and provided them with social and historical facts about Kurdistan. Third, although in 2006 he submitted to the Appeals Board that he had requested 12 Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifty-third Session, Supplement No. 44 (A/53/44 and Corr.1), annex IX. 7