A/69/44 expulsions, which stands in contrast with the small number of complaints received by AIG. The Committee also regrets that non-governmental organizations (NGOs) still have only limited access to expulsion operations and that oversight mechanisms, such as video recordings, have not yet been set up (art. 3). The Committee requests the State party to take the necessary measures to strengthen the independence, impartiality and efficiency of AIG, in particular by providing it with appropriate means to monitor expulsions and by giving it the necessary means to receive and consider complaints. The Committee reiterates its previous recommendation (CAT/C/BEL/CO/2, para. 6) and requests the State party to take measures to enhance oversight, such as the use of video recordings and monitoring by NGOs. The Committee recommends that the State party take effective measures to restrict the use of means of restraint during expulsion operations. Administrative detention of asylum seekers (21) The Committee commends the State party for its efforts in respect of asylum and refugees, which have included the use of alternatives to detention for families with children who are seeking asylum. However, the Committee remains concerned by reports that, as a result of the application of the Dublin II Regulation, asylum seekers are systematically detained for the entire duration of the asylum procedure and by the information provided by the State party during the dialogue, according to which, asylum seekers may be deprived of their liberty for as long as 9 months in such cases (arts. 11 and 16). The Committee urges the State party to ensure that the detention of asylum seekers is used only as a last resort and, where necessary, for as short a period as possible and without excessive restrictions. It also urges the State party to establish and use arrangements other than the detention of asylum seekers. Non-refoulement and the risk of torture (22) The Committee is concerned by the fact that the State party’s existing extradition and refoulement procedures make it possible to extradite a person who is at risk of being tortured if the State party has obtained diplomatic assurances (art. 3). The Committee recalls its position that States parties may in no circumstances rely on diplomatic assurances rather than observing the principle of non-refoulement, which may alone serve as a guarantee of adequate protection against the risk of torture or ill-treatment when there are substantial grounds for believing that a person would be in danger of being subjected to torture. In order to determine the applicability of the obligations it has assumed under article 3 of the Convention, the State party should thoroughly examine the merits of each individual case, including the overall situation with regard to torture in the country concerned. Measures of redress and compensation for victims of torture or ill-treatment (23) The Committee is concerned about the lack of information on the number of claims for compensation made by victims of acts of torture or ill-treatment and on the compensation awarded to victims. The Committee also regrets the absence of information on the measures taken by the State party to provide rehabilitation for the victims of torture or ill-treatment (art. 14). Recalling its general comment No. 3 (2012) on the application of article 14 by States parties, the Committee recommends that the State party ensure that all victims of acts of torture or ill-treatment can fully exercise their right to redress and receive the means necessary for their full rehabilitation. GE.14-12596 23