CAT/C/34/D/222/2002 page 10 7. Accordingly, the Committee against Torture, acting under article 22, paragraph 7, of the Convention, concludes that the complainant’s removal to Pakistan by the State party would not constitute a breach of article 3 of the Convention. [Adopted in English, French, Russian and Spanish, the French text being the original version. Subsequently to be issued also in Arabic and Chinese as part of the Committee’s annual report to the General Assembly.] Notes 1 Communication No. 57/1996 (P.Q.L. v. Canada): “… even if it were certain that the author would be arrested on his return to China because of his prior convictions, the mere fact that he would be arrested and retried would not constitute substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture”. The same applies a fortiori to the mere risk of being detained (Communication No. 65/1997, I.A.O. v. Sweden). 2 Ibid. 3 Communication No. 94/1997 (K.N. v. Switzerland). 4 Communications Nos. 83/1997 (G.R.B. v. Sweden), 130 and 131/1999 (V.X.N. and H.N. v. Sweden), and 94/1997 (K.N. v. Switzerland). 5 Reuters report dated 14 August 2002. 6 Following a complaint to the police from the Muslim Students Federation when it learned of the complainant’s Christian activities while he was serving as President of the Federation. -----