CAT/C/50/D/463/2011 wife to Kazakhstan – returned to Uzbekistan and lived with his parents, and that he did not report any acts against members of his family other than the police requesting information about the complainant’s whereabouts. Accordingly, the Committee considers that the complainant has failed to provide sufficient evidence in support of his claims to the effect that he would be exposed to a real risk of torture if he is removed to Uzbekistan. 9.9 In the light of the foregoing, the Committee finds that the complainant has not established that, in case of his expulsion to the country of origin, he would face a foreseeable, real and personal risk of being tortured within the meaning of article 3 of the Convention, that could prompt the Committee to arrive at the conclusion which would be different from that of the State party’s migration authorities and the courts. 10. Accordingly, the Committee against Torture, acting under article 22, paragraph 7, of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, concludes that the complainant’s removal to Uzbekistan by the State party would not constitute a breach of article 3 of the Convention. [Adopted in English, French and Spanish, the English text being the original version. Subsequently to be issued also in Arabic, Russian and Chinese as part of the Committee’s annual report to the General Ass embly.] 13