Recommended textual changes and additions Paragraph 39 Insert a new paragraph, paragraph 39bis, as follows: 39.bis While directly applicable to individual communications under Article 22 of the Convention alleging violations of the prohibition of refoulement, the content of this section of the General Comment further provides critical guidance to States parties on the effective implementation of their nonrefoulement obligations under the Convention as a whole. [Footnote to reference para. 3 of the draft as amended by our recommended textual changes] Paragraph 40 40. With respect to the application of Article 3 of the Convention to the merits of Whether before the States parties’ authorities when making a claim to protection against refoulement under the Convention or before this Committee in the context of a communication submitted under Article 22 of the Convention, the burden of proof is upon the author of the communication who has to present an arguable case31 – i.e. to submit circumstantiated arguments showing that the danger of being subjected to torture is foreseeable, present, personal and real. However, where an arguable case of past torture or other ill-treatment is made as evidence that a prospective real risk of such treatment upon transfer exists, the burden of proof shifts to the State party to credibly refute that risk. In practice, this places a specific obligation on the State party to effectively investigate the claim, including the veracity of the allegations of past torture or other ill-treatment, as well as the bearing that they may have, if any, on the real risk of torture or other illtreatment upon transfer. wWhen the complainant is … the burden of proof is reversed32 and it is up to the State concerned to investigate the allegations and verify the information on which the communication is based. The Istanbul Protocol, and in particular its principles guiding forensic medical evaluations, are among the applicable standards for such an investigation.” Paragraph 42 42. In its procedure of assessment, … especially if the person is deprived of his/her liberty or the person is in a particularly considered to be vulnerable and/or particularly at risk situation such as the situation of, including if they are an asylum seeker, a person with disabilities, a mentally ill person, a pregnant woman, a victim of torture or other ill-treatment, an unaccompanied minor or a woman person who has been subjected to violence of a sexual or other gender-based nature. Paragraph 43 43. Guarantees and safeguards should include linguistic, legal, medical, psychological, social and, when necessary, financial assistance… In particular, an independent medical and psychological examination requested by a complainant according to the standards in the Istanbul Protocol to prove the torture that he/she has suffered allegations should always be ensured,… so that the authorities deciding on a given case of involuntary transfer deportation are able to complete the assessment of the risk of torture on the basis of the result of that independent medical and psychological examination, without any reasonable doubt. ” Paragraph 44 44. As regards potential factual contradictions and inconsistencies in the author's allegations, the States parties should not require complete accuracy, as it can seldom be expected from victims of torture, unless such inconsistencies give rise to doubts about the general veracity of the author's claims. Torture victims and other vulnerable persons frequently suffer from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), which can result in a broad range of symptoms, including involuntary avoidance and dissociation. These symptoms 38 AI Index: IOR 40/6040/2017