CAT/C/35/D/235/2003 Page 10 only be able to obtain such evidence once arrested. The current status of the charges against him remains in any event unclear, since, according to the State party, the relevant legislation has been repealed. While the complainant notes that no amnesty has been issued in relation to offences under the legislation, such an amnesty would ordinarily only apply to a conviction, rather than to criminal charges – the Committee also considers that the complainant has not been able to substantiate his claims that the prosecution of charges fired against him will proceed, even though the relevant legislation has been repealed. As a consequence, it does not consider it likely that the complainant risks imprisonment on return. 6.9 In the circumstances, the Committee concludes that the expulsion of the complainant to Bangladesh would not violate the State party’s obligations under article 3 of the Convention. 7. The Committee against Torture, acting under article 22, paragraph 7, of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, concludes that the removal of the complainant to Bangladesh would not constitute a breach of article 3 of the Convention. [Adopted in English, French, Russian and Spanish, the English text being the original version. Subsequently to be issued also in Arabic and Chinese as part of the Committee’s annual report to the General Assembly.] -----