CAT/C/47/D/351/2008 9.6 While at the conclusion of its general comment the Committee is at liberty to appreciate the facts in the light of all the circumstances of each case, it recalls that is not an appellate judicial body and that it must attach considerable weight to findings of fact made by organs of the State party concerned.10 In this particular case, the Committee gives the requisite weight to the conclusions of the State party’s organs, which considered the facts and evidence submitted by the complainant for the asylum procedure and concluded that the complainant lacks credibility. The conclusions are based on the unlikelihood and inconsistencies of her account, particularly with regard to the secret information she allegedly passed to the Rwandan rebel forces, the contacts with her brothers, the supposed warning by the National Intelligence Agency official, her flight from the country and the details regarding the members of her family. The conclusions also rest on the use of evidence which is considered to be forged – such as the above-mentioned newspaper article11 and the written statement by Mr. Luhulu Lunghe, rapporteur for the Congolese Parliament. The Committee has paid due attention to the complainant’s comments, but nonetheless considers that her arguments have not been sufficiently substantiated to refute or clarify the contradictions noted by the State party in her observations. 9.7 In light of the above, the Committee is not persuaded that on the whole the facts as submitted are sufficient to conclude that the complainant would face a foreseeable, real and personal risk of being subjected to torture if returned to the Democratic Republic of the Congo in the meaning of article 3 of the Convention. 10. 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 the Democratic Republic of the Congo would not constitute a breach by the State party of article 3 of the Convention. [Adopted in English, French and Spanish, the French text being the original version. Subsequently to be issued also in Arabic, Chinese and Russian as part of the Committee’s annual report to the General Assembly.] 10 11 8 See the Committee’s general comment No. 1, supra, para. 9. See also, inter alia, the Committee’s decision in T.D. v. Switzerland (communication No. 375/2009), of 26 May 2011, para. 7.8. The font and character size used for the article in question, entitled “Mme E.L. recherché [sic] traquée par la police politique” (Ms. E.L. wanted and hounded by the political police), which is included in the file, differ in objective terms from those used for the rest of the page. The article appears on the “Economy and Society” page of La Manchette newspaper (28 January 2005). The Committee also noted that the title of the letter confirming the authenticity of the article contains a gross spelling error (“La Machette” instead of “La Manchette”). GE.12-40233