the host State’s obligation under international refugee law to respect the principle of non-refoulement. 57 Removal to a country other than the country of origin or former habitual residence 37. The question of removal may arise with respect to a country other than the asylum-seeker’s country of origin or former habitual residence. In such cases, the host State would be required under international refugee, human rights and customary international law to evaluate the risks resulting from the person’s transfer to that country. Any diplomatic assurances provided by the receiving State would need to be assessed in light of the criteria described above at paragraphs 20–26, with a view to determining whether they would constitute a suitable and reliable tool to eliminate a risk of persecution and/or any other form of harm facing the asylum-seeker upon removal. 58 If a risk of persecution or onward transfer to such a risk exists, the host State’s obligations under Article 33(1) of the 1951 Convention and customary international law would preclude the removal of the asylum-seeker. If there is no such risk, the asylumseeker may be transferred, provided that the States involved ensure that he or she has access to an asylum procedure. 59 57 However, in such cases, diplomatic assurances would be an element to be considered in determining whether the person concerned has a well-founded fear of persecution. See below at paragraphs 44–55. 58 See below at paragraphs 44–55. 59 Where the asylum-seeker is transferred on the basis of an extradition request, the asylum procedure in the requested State should be suspended. Consideration of the asylum procedure should be resumed and brought to its final conclusion after the resolution of the prosecution, whether by conviction and sentence or by acquittal. This could be done either in the State where the asylum application was initially pending, or through transfer of responsibility for examining the asylum application to the State to which he or she was extradited. In any event, the removal of an asylum-seeker will be consistent with the sending State’s obligations under the 1951 Convention only if the receiving State can be considered a “safe third country” (see below at footnote 65). See UNHCR, Recommendations on the European Commission Proposal for a Council Framework Decision on the European Arrest Warrant and the Surrender Procedures between Member States COM(2001)522 final 2001/0215 (CNS)), October 2001; see also UNHCR, Provisional Comments on the Proposal for a European Council Directive on Minimum Standards on Procedures in Member States for Granting and Withdrawing Refugee Status (Council Document 14203/04, Asile 64, of 9 November 2004) (hereafter: “UNHCR, Provisional Comments”), comment on Article 6. 15