without taking into account the risks to the physical integrity and lives of the persons concerned in the country of destination (arts. 6 and 7). --CCPR/CO/75/YEM, para. 18 (2002). ***** [The State party] takes the position that compelling security interests may be invoked to justify the removal of aliens to countries where they may face a substantial risk of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. The Committee refers to its General Comment [No. 20] on article 7 and recommends that [the State party] revise this policy in order to comply with the requirements of article 7 and to meet its obligation never to expel, extradite, deport or otherwise remove a person to a place where treatment or punishment that is contrary to article 7 is a substantial risk. --CCPR/C/79/Add.105, para. 13 (1999). ***** The Human Rights Committee has also expressed concern with respect to nonrefoulement and access to asylum more generally: The Committee recognizes that the security requirements relating to the events of 11 September 2001 have given rise to efforts by [the State party] to take legislative and other measures to implement Security Council resolution 1373 (2001). The Committee, however, expresses its concern that the impact of such measures or changes in policy on [the State party’s] obligations under the Covenant may not have been fully considered. The Committee is concerned about possible negative effects of the new legislation and practices on asylumseekers, including by "removing the immigration risk offshore" and in the absence of monitoring mechanisms with regard to the expulsion of those suspected of terrorism to their countries of origin which, despite assurances that their human rights would be respected, could pose risks to the personal safety and lives of the persons expelled (articles 6 and 7 of the Covenant). The State party is under an obligation to ensure that measures taken to implement Security Council resolution 1373 (2001) are in full conformity with the Covenant…. In addition, the State party should maintain its practice of strictly observing the principle of non-refoulement. --CCPR/CO/75/NZL, para. 11 (2002). ***** The Committee against Torture has also addressed the question of non-refoulement of asylum seekers and other foreigners, including with reference to article 3 of the Convention against Torture: 80