CAT/C/30/D/201/2002 page 8 8. The Committee against Torture, acting under article 22, paragraph 7, of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, considers that the complainant has not substantiated his claim that he would be subjected to torture upon return to Turkey and therefore concludes that the complainant’s removal to that country would not constitute a breach by the State party 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.] Notes 1 No further details are supplied as to these activities. 2 No further details are supplied on these problems. 3 Amnesty International “Endemic torture must end immediately” (8 November 2001); “Annual report on Turkey” (1999, 2000 and 2001); Human Rights Watch “World report” (2000 and 2001); Human Rights Association of Turkey “Human rights violations in Turkey” (21 November 2001); Pro Asyl “Von Deutschland in den türkischen Folterkeller: Zur Rückkehrgefährdung von Kurdinnen und Kurden” (June 2000); Schweizerische Flüchtlingshilfe “Türkei: Zur aktuellen Situation in Mai 2001” (June 2001). 4 De Volkskrant “Opstelster Turks rapport over martelen aangeklaagd” (26 July 2001); NRC Handelsblad “Auteur van Turks Martelboek vertelt: ‘Van gevangenen 90 procent gemarteld’” (21 November 2001). 5 This report is not supplied: according to the complainant, it found facilities of torture in visits in 1998 and 2000, with a former chairwoman of the commission contending that 90 per cent of prisoners are subjected to ill-treatment. 6 SL v. Sweden Case No. 150/1999, Views adopted on 11 May 2001; MBB v. Sweden Case No. 104/1998, Views adopted on 21 June 1999; SMR v. Sweden Case No. 103/1998, Views adopted on 11 June 1999. -----