CAT/C/55/D/555/2013 that are made by organs of the State party concerned, 13 while at the same time it is not bound by such findings and instead has the power, provided by article 22 (4) of the Convention, of free assessment of the facts based on the full set of circumstances in every case. 7.4 In assessing the risk of torture in the present case, the Committee notes the complainant’s contention that there is a foreseeable, real and personal risk that he will be tortured and possibly killed if returned to China, because he was arrested, detained and tortured by the Chinese police in 2005 after having transported in his taxi a suspected Uighur terrorist and that the police went looking for him at his home during his detention and during the month thereafter. The Committee also notes the State party’s observation that its domestic authorities found that the complainant lacked credibility because, inter alia, he did not apply for asylum in a timely manner after the incidents that caused him to flee China in 2005, but waited until he had been arrested in 2011; he made conflicting statements regarding his ethnicity; his claims concerning the actions of the Chinese police during his detention and subsequent release were implausible; he made vague replies to questions about his home city and life there; a language test indicated that his use of language is incompatible with the speech patterns of the province from which he claims to be; and he refused to answer questions concerning his asylum application during his second interview with the Danish Immigration Service in 2013. The Committee observes that the complainant has not denied the State party’s assertion that he made conflicting statements regarding his ethnicity. The Committee also notes that the incidents that led the complainant to leave China occurred in 2005, and observes that the complainant has not made any allegations or provided any evidence concerning the critical issue of whether he currently runs a risk of torture if returned to China today, given that 10 years have passed. 7.5 The Committee takes note of the complainant’s claims that he has three fingers missing, which were cut off by the Chinese police; that his request for a medical examination to ascertain whether he has signs of torture was denied by the Danish authorities; and that he did not have the funds to pay for such an examination himself. The Committee observes, however, that in the present case, where the complainant has failed to substantiate basic elements of his claims, as described in para. 7.4 above, the responsible organs of the State party have thoroughly evaluated all the evidence presented by the complainant and have found it to lack credibility. The Committee therefore finds that the complainant has not demonstrated that the authorities of the State party that considered the case have failed to conduct a proper assessment of the risk of torture. 7.6 The Committee observes that, even assuming that the complainant was tortured in the past, the alleged instances of torture did not occur in the recent past. The Committee notes that, even if it were to accept the claim that the complainant was subjected to torture in the past, the question is whether he currently runs a risk of torture if returned to China. It does not necessarily follow that, 10 years after the alleged events occurred, he would still currently be at risk of being subjected to torture if returned to his country of origin. 14 7.7 In addition, the Committee observes that the complainant did not present any documentary evidence that there were any criminal proceedings pending against him or that the Chinese authorities had issued an arrest warrant for him. On the contrary, according to his own statement, after his arrest he had been released without charges. 13 14 10 See, inter alia, communication No. 356/2008, N.S. v. Switzerland, decision adopted on 6 May 2010, para. 7.3. See communications No. 431/2010, Y. v. Switzerland, decision adopted on 21 May 2013, para. 7.7, and No. 491/2012, E.E.E. v. Switzerland, decisions adopted on 8 May 2015, para. 7.5.