Advance unedited version comprehensive reparative concept therefore entails restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition and refers to the full scope of measures required to redress violations under the Convention. 27 22. States parties should take into account that victims of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment suffer physical and psychological harm which may require sustained specialized rehabilitation services. Once their health fragility and need for treatment have been medically certified, they should not be removed to a State where adequate medical services for their rehabilitation are not available or guaranteed. VI. Article 3 of the Convention and extradition treaties 23. States parties may find that a conflict arises between the obligations they have undertaken under Article 3 of the Convention and the obligations they have undertaken under a multilateral or bilateral extradition treaty, especially when the treaty was concluded before the ratification of the Convention with a State which is not a party to the Convention and, therefore, when not yet bound by the provisions of its Article 3. In this case, the relevant extradition treaty should be applied in accordance with the principle of non-refoulement. 24. The Committee acknowledges that the timeframe for extradition of a person for the purpose of criminal prosecution or serving a sentence, who has submitted a communication under Article 22 of the Convention invoking the principle of “non-refoulement”, is a crucial factor for the respect by the State of its obligations under both the Convention and an extradition treaty to which it is a party. The Committee, therefore, requests a State party in such situation to inform the Committee about any possible conflict between its obligations under the Convention and under an extradition treaty from the beginning of the individual complaint procedure in which the State party is involved so that the Committee would try to give priority to the consideration of that communication before the time limit for the obligatory extradition is reached. The State party concerned, however, should take into account that the Committee can give priority to the consideration of and decision on such communication only during its sessions. 25. Furthermore, those States parties to the Convention which, subsequently, consider the conclusion of or adherence to an extradition treaty should ensure that there is no conflict between the Convention and that treaty and, if there is, they should include in the notification of adherence to the extradition treaty the clause that, in case of conflict, the Convention will prevail. VII. Relationship between Article 3 and Article 16 of the Convention 26. Article 3 of the Convention, which provides protection against the removal of a person in danger of being subjected to torture in the State to which he/she would be deported, should be without prejudice to Article 16 (2) of the Convention, in particular where a person to be removed would enjoy additional protection, under international instruments or national law, not to be deported to a State where he/she would face a risk of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.28 27 28 6 See General Comment No. 3 (2012): Implementation of article 14 by States parties (CAT/C/GC/3), para. 2. Examples of other international provisions directly relevant to the application of the principle