CAT/C/46/D/310/2007 3.2 The complainant claims that the State party would violate article 3 of the Convention, if it were to deport him to Syria again. It was an established fact that he had been gravely tortured and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment for treason in Syria in 1997. International human rights reports indicated that the frequent use of torture by Syrian security forces had not changed since then. He argues that the Syrian security service considered him a security risk and as someone who could join political groups hostile to the regime in power and engage in activities against national interests. It was therefore plausible that the security service would keep him under surveillance by requiring him to regularly report to it and by restricting his freedom of movement. The imposition of restrictions on him was a logical consequence of his past engagement in the Lebanese Forces. He reiterates that the Swedish authorities have failed to refute his prima facie case of a risk of torture in Syria, in particular that he had violated the restrictions on him by fleeing the country. 3.3 For the complainant, it is inevitable that if he were to be returned, the Syrian authorities would investigate his activities abroad, suspect him of conspiracy against the Syrian State, and consider him a valuable source of information about anti-Syrian political circles abroad. Therefore, it was likely that he would be detained, interrogated and subjected to torture, which formed a routine part of the investigation process in Syria. The Syrian authorities’ motive to extract information from him was considerable; and it was unlikely that they would refrain from using torture. Even in the absence of restrictions, there would still be a high risk that the Syrian security service would arrest him on arrival at Damascus airport and interrogate and torture him. The fact that he had previously been convicted of treason and that he had been expelled from a third country after a prolonged stay abroad for “unclear” reasons, made him a politically suspicious person. 3.4 The complainant submits that he has exhausted all available domestic remedies in Sweden, as the decision of the Ministry of Justice rejecting his application to revoke the court orders against him and to grant him a residence permit was final and not subject to any appeal. H e also submits that the same matter has not been, and is not being, examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement. State party’s observations on admissibility and merits 4.1 On 10 October 2007, the State party made a submission on the admissibility and the merits of the communication, arguing that the complainant’s claims about his present risk of being subjected to torture and that in 1997 are inadmissible under article 22, paragraph 2, of the Convention, for being manifestly unfounded. Subsidiarily, the State party submits that his claims are without merit. 4.2 On admissibility, the State party, after describing the relevant domestic legislation (the Penal Code and the 1989 and 2005 Aliens Acts), does not challenge that the complainant has exhausted all available domestic remedies in Sweden and that the same matter has not been, and is not being, examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement. However, it considers that his claims about the incompatibility with article 3 of the Convention of his deportation in 1997, as well as of a possible second deportation, fail to rise to the basic level of substantiation required for purposes of admissibility. The State party concludes that the communication is inadmissible for being manifestly unfounded under article 22, paragraph 2, of the Convention and under rule 107(b) of the Committee’s rules of procedure. 4.3 On substance, the State party recalls the Committee’s General Comment on the implementation of article 3 of the Convention: While the Committee must take into account all relevant considerations when determining whether the forced return of a person to another country would violate article 3, including, where applicable, the existence of a 6