CAT/C/37/D/265/2005** Page 9 the authenticity of the document in question. It recalls its jurisprudence that it is for the complainant to collect and present evidence in support of his account of events.1 11.7 With regard to the general human rights situation in Azerbaijan, the Committee takes note of the State party’s argument that, although human rights abuses are still being reported in Azerbaijan, this country has made some progress towards improving the human rights situation since it joined the Council of Europe and that efforts are being made towards releasing political prisoners. 11.8 In light of all the above, the Committee is not persuaded that the complainant would face a real, personal, and foreseeable risk of torture if deported to Azerbaijan. 12. 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 removal of the complainant to Azerbaijan would not constitute a breach of article 3 of the Convention. [Adopted in English, French, Russian and Spanish, the English 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.] ----- 1 Vid. S.L. v Sweden, Communication No. 150/1999, Views adopted on 11 May 2001, para.6.4 ; and M.Z. v Sweden, Communication No. 256, Views adopted on 17 May 2006, para. 9.5.