CAT/C/52/D/455/2011 identity documents in her protection visa application and in the RRT application; and that the complainant had claimed to be a Tien Tao practitioner only after she had withdrawn her claim that she was a Falun Gong practitioner. The Committee recalls that, under general comment No. 1 (para. 5), the burden to present an arguable case lies with the author of a communication. In this connection, irrespective of the question regarding the complainant’s affiliation with the Tien Tao religion, the Committee is of the view that she has failed to submit convincing evidence to substantiate her claim that she would be in danger of being subjected to torture were she to be returned to China. 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 China 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, Chinese and Russian as part of the Committee’s annual report to the General Assembly.] 9