CAT/C/56/D/586/2014 contrary to article 3. The State party maintains that the complainants have failed to substantiate their claims that they would run such a risk. 4.11 The State party wishes to draw the Committee’s attention to the fact that several provisions in the Aliens Act reflect the same principles as those laid down in article 3 of the Convention. Thus, the Swedish migration authorities apply the same kind of test when considering an application for asylum under the Aliens Act as the Committee applies when examining a complaint under the Convention. That such a test has been applied in the present case is indicated by the fact that, in their rulings, the Swedish authorities make reference to chapter 4, sections 1, 2 and 2a, of the Aliens Act. Furthermore, according to chapter 12, sections 1-3, of the Aliens Act, an alien may never be expelled to a country where there is fair reason to assume that the alien would be in danger of receiving the death penalty or being subjected to corporal punishment, torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, or to a country where the alien is not protected from being sent on to a country in which the alien would be in such danger. 4.12 Moreover, the State party maintains that the national authorities are in a very good position to assess the information submitted by an asylum seeker and to appraise the credibility of his or her claims. In this regard, the State party wishes to underline that, in the present case, the Migration Board and the Migration Court conducted thorough examinations of the complainants’ case. When the complainants applied for asylum, the Migration Board conducted multiple individual interviews with the first and second complainants to give them an opportunity to submit the reasons for their need for protection and to explain all the facts relevant to the Migration Board’s assessment. The extensive interviews with the complainants were conducted in the presence of their legal counsel and an interpreter, whom the complainants confirmed they understood well. In addition, the Migration Board also conducted child-focused interviews with the second complainant in her capacity as parent of the third, fourth and fifth complainants and with the first and second complainants in their capacity as parents when an application for asylum was made on behalf of the sixth complainant, who was born in Sweden. Furthermore, the complainants have argued their case in writing before the Migration Board and the migration courts. Throughout the asylum procedure, the complainants were represented by a legal counsel. The decision of the Migration Board was appealed against, but was not overturned by the Migration Court. Against this background, the State party holds that it must be considered that the Migration Board and the migration courts had sufficient information, together with the facts and documentation in the case, to ensure that they had a solid basis for making a well-informed, transparent and reasonable risk assessment of the complainants’ need for protection in Sweden. 4.13 In this connection, the State party wishes to recall paragraph 9 of the Committee’s general comment No. 1 (1997) on the implementation of article 3 of the Convention, as well as its jurisprudence, stating that the Committee is not an appellate, quasi-judicial or administrative body and that considerable weight will be given to findings of facts that are made by organs of the State party concerned.8 Moreover, the Committee has held that it is for the courts of the States parties to the Convention, and not for the Committee, to evaluate the facts and evidence in a particular case, unless it can be ascertained that the manner in which such facts and evidence were evaluated was clearly arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice.9 8 9 The State party refers, for example, to communication No. 277/2005, N.Z.S. v. Sweden, decision adopted on 22 November 2006, para. 8.6. The State party refers, for example, to communication No. 219/2002, G.K. v. Switzerland, decision of 7 May 2003, para. 6.12. 7