Non-refoulement and risk of torture (art. 3) (28) The Committee is concerned by the failure of the State party to clarify how it includes in its national laws or practice the prohibition on returning a person to a country where he or she faces a substantial risk of torture, and hence how the State party ensures that its obligations under article 3 of the Convention are fulfilled (art. 3). Under no circumstances should the State party expel, return or extradite a person to a State where there are substantial grounds for believing that the person would be in danger of being subjected to torture. When determining the applicability of its obligations under article 3 of the Convention, the State party should examine thoroughly the merits of each individual case, ensure that adequate judicial mechanisms for the review of the decision are in place and sufficient legal defence available for each person subject to extradition, and ensure effective post-return monitoring arrangements. The State party should adopt appropriate legislation to incorporate into domestic law its obligation under article 3 of the Convention, thereby preventing any persons from being expelled, returned or extradited to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he or she would be in danger of being subject to torture. Universal jurisdiction (29) The Committee regrets the lack of clarity and information on the existence of the necessary legislative measures establishing the State party’s jurisdiction over acts of torture (arts. 5, 6, 7 and 8). The State party should establish its jurisdiction over acts of torture in cases where the alleged offender is present in any territory under its jurisdiction, either to extradite or prosecute him or her, in accordance with the provisions of the Convention. Truth and Reconciliation Commission (30) The Committee acknowledges that the Constitutional Court has repealed Law No. 27/2004 on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission because it would have sanctioned amnesty for non-derogable offences. Nonetheless, the Committee remains concerned about the mandate of a future commission, as cited in the State party’s reply to the Committee’s list of issues (arts. 2, 12 and 14). The State party should consider carefully the mandate of the future Commission of Truth and Reconciliation, in the light of other similar international experiences and in compliance with its obligation under the Convention. Such a commission should, inter alia, be empowered to investigate gross human rights violations and compensate victims while proscribing amnesties for perpetrators of acts of torture. Witness and victim protection (31) While welcoming the adoption of Law No. 13/2006 on Witness and Victim Protection, the Committee remains concerned about the absence of implementing regulations, the mistreatment of witnesses and victims, and the insufficient training of law enforcement officials and allocation of Government funds to support the new system (arts. 12, 13 and 14). The State party should, without delay, establish a witness and victim protection body, with all relevant measures required to implement Law No. 13/2006, including the allocation of necessary funding for the functioning of such a new system, the adequate training of law enforcement officials, especially in cooperation with civil society organizations, and an appropriate gender-balanced composition. 70