would also strongly advise against any “further elaborat[ion] on the issue” as indicated in footnote 11 of the current draft, to the extent that any such elaboration would weaken the position set out. Recommended textual changes: 19. Delete paragraph 19 in its entirety. 20. Whenever there are substantial grounds for believing that anybody facing an involuntary transfer would be in danger of being subjected to torture or other ill-treatment upon such transfer, Tthe Committee considers that diplomatic assurances from the a State party to the Convention to which a person is to be transferred deported are contrary to the principle of “non-refoulement”, provided for by article 3 of the Convention, and they should not be used. as a loophole to undermine that principle, where there are substantial grounds for believing that he/she would be in danger of being subjected to torture in that State.12 f) Section V: Redress and compensation, paragraphs 21-22 i) Paragraph 21 43. The clarity and guidance value of paragraph 21 would be enhanced by ensuring that the language used regarding the right of a survivor of torture to rehabilitation be consistent with that used in other interpretative guidance issued by the Committee on the issue.71 In particular the holistic nature of rehabilitation and the criteria against which a State’s obligations to provide rehabilitation are measured – i.e. on the basis that rehabilitation services are available, appropriate and readily accessible – could be addressed more clearly. In addition, the draft should state expressly that a State that has transferred individuals in violation of the refoulement prohibition is obliged to repair the harm it has caused to those persons, including by providing them with access to an independent medical and psychological evaluation to assess the extent of harm suffered and their rehabilitation needs. Further to this, the person should be provided immediately with access to holistic rehabilitation services. In light of the above, we recommend the following textual changes to paragraph 21. Recommended textual changes: 21. States parties should take into account that victims of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment suffer physical and psychological traumas which may require support from sustained specialized holistic rehabilitation services, treatment including medical and psychological care, as well as legal and social services. Once their health fragility and need for treatment has been medically certified, they should not be removed to a State where adequate medical services for their rehabilitation linked to their torturerelated trauma are not available or not guaranteed. Where the person has been evaluated physically or psychologically and signs of torture or other ill-treatment have been identified, they are entitled to rehabilitation and therefore should not be removed to a State where specialized holistic rehabilitation services are not available, accessible or appropriate, and are not guaranteed at the earliest point in time after the person’s return. ii) Paragraph 22 44. States parties are obligated to afford reparation when Article 3 is breached, as previously identified by the Committee in its jurisprudence and Concluding Observations. This obligation flows directly from the breach of the international obligation owed by States parties and should be set out clearly and authoritatively in the General Comment. The language in paragraph 22 uses terms such as 71 In particular paras 11-15 CAT, General Comment No. 3, UN Doc. CAT /C/GC/3, 19 November 2012. 22 AI Index: IOR 40/6040/2017