WPC3 ZH:QG Tº6ojuJew3N2e*N OVCF(܀DkruMykH'"*4Y}XB3ƷUim J6h%cKUJ5unfX9iqP^# :Sdo,!OB s#RK;|o=B).%6`TPnqQ#4BHdL>Ԏ}P9H<֗= 'sr3:F5z+6֦jF]eizQK+ 68u(2ՍLh5ytޱn]4UzxqØ^o̧ڵ3bBJO_7+/8x_ʥwN+ CδR+X`^'`HgmTwyFD^ftm Ju~\`%\d#xUN9 % 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0m 0R 04 0 0 0 0 0 0e 0; 0 0 0 0u 0V 04 0 0 0 0 0] 0) 00 0<"! 0^! 0>" 0vZ" 0`" 0`0# 0`# 0`# 0`P$ 08$ 0$ 02% 0% 0:& 0Y"' 0_{' 0 ' 0j( 0N* B*+ D/+ D++, 0V, D/- 0 . 06. 0 / 0:0 0^O0 0<0U60U>1U*]1]1 B711 0U2 0(2 AM3333333333333333333 BWN3N3N3N3^ 3w34333 m3HP LaserJet 6P/6MP - Standard0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX($UKUS.,2J+M 0_level1  X 2( ` hp x 223  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2G+M 0_level2   /%` ` hp x /23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2D+M 0_level3   ," hp x ,23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2A+M 0_level4  ` ) hp x )23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2>+M 0_level5   &hhp x &23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2;+M 0_level6   #p x #23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  28+M 0_level7  h  p x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  25+M 0_level8   pp x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  22+M 0_level9    x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2JM 0_levsl1  X 2( ` hp x 223  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2GM 0_levsl2   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2DM 0_levsl3   ," hp x ,23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2AM 0_levsl4  ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2>M 0_levsl5   &hhp x &23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2;M 0_levsl6   #p x #23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  28M 0_levsl7  h  p x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  25M 0_levsl8   pp x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  22M 0_levsl9    x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2JM 0_levnl1  X 2( ` hp x 223   5+ ` hp x 5  2GM 0_levnl2   /%` ` hp x /23   5+ ` hp x 5  2DM 0_levnl3   ," hp x ,23   5+ ` hp x 5  2AM 0_levnl4  ` ) hp x )23   5+ ` hp x 5  2>M 0_levnl5   &hhp x &23   5+ ` hp x 5  2;M 0_levnl6   #p x #23   5+ ` hp x 5  28M 0_levnl7  h  p x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  25M 0_levnl8   pp x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  22M 0_levnl9    x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  0.Normal<:Definition T<AA:Definition L , 5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 586Definition(''&H1      XXX(&H2  XXX(&H3  XXX(&H4 XXX XXX(&H5  XXX(&H6  XXX20Address8MM6Blockquote , , 5+ ` hp x 5   5+ ` hp x 5,*CITE,dl*CODEK?<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXS@\  `&Times New RomanS42Emphasis64Hyperlink    <:FollowedHype    4go2Keyboard K?<6X9`(Courier NewK XXXS@\  `&Times New RomanS<:Preformatted/%  ,Kk %#/K?<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXS@\  `&Times New RomanS/%  ,Kk %#/<:zBottom of 75(X7  ?A%2A`Arial?76(X7  XXXS@\  `&Times New RomanS&  d d4)1dxd'dxd<:zTop of For78(X7  ?A%2A`Arial?76(X7  XXXS@\  `&Times New RomanS4)2dxd0KS.SampleK?<6X9`(Courier NewKS@\  `&Times New RomanS0.Strong 8dl6TypewriterK?<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXS@\  `&Times New RomanS42Variable: 8HTML MarkupB      2 0CommentB  <6X9`(Courier New\  `&Times New Roman%2A`Arial3+  d d d Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5(-2F$ !UKUS.,  ($DEF6A<< cS$ Button Top/Left1+ d F 2td- :PB-rtyBar3|xU !UKUS.,  _  COMMITTEEAGAINSTTORTURE  B.S.V.Canada  14November2001 p CommunicationNo.166/2000 P  CAT/C/27/D/166/2000 0  VIEWS P   Submittedby:_B.S._Ԁ(namewithheld)@XXXX[representedbycounsel]#XXX@Xړ#   Allegedvictim:Thepetitioner  Stateparty:Canada  Dateofcommunication:22April1999 p TheCommitteeagainstTorture,establishedunderarticle17oftheConventionagainstTortureand @ OtherCruel,InhumanorDegradingTreatmentorPunishment, 0 Meetingon14November2001, ` HavingconcludeditsconsiderationofcommunicationNo.166/2000,submittedtotheCommittee @ againstTortureunderarticle22oftheConventionagainstTortureandOtherCruel,Inhumanor 0 DegradingTreatmentorPunishment,   HavingtakenintoaccountallinformationmadeavailabletoitbythepetitionerandtheStateparty, "  AdoptsitViewsunderarticle22,paragraph7,oftheConvention. $" 1.1ThepetitionerisB.S.,anIraniannational,currentlyresidinginVancouver,Canada.Heclaims `'"% thathisremovaltotheIslamicRepublicofIranwouldentailaviolationofarticle3ofthe P(#& ConventionagainstTortureandOtherCruel,InhumanorDegradingTreatmentorPunishmentby @)$' Canada.Heisrepresentedbycounsel. 0*%( 1.2Inaccordancewitharticle22,paragraph3,oftheConvention,theCommitteebroughtthe ,`'* communicationtotheattentionoftheStatepartyon21July2000.Atthesametime,actingunder -P(+ rule108,paragraph9,ofitsrulesofprocedure,theCommitteerequestedtheStatepartynottoexpel -@), thepetitionertotheIslamicRepublicofIranwhilehiscommunicationwasbeingconsidered.The  Statepartyaccededtothisrequest.  Thefactsassubmittedbythepetitioner  2.1On2August1990,thepetitionerarrivedinCanada.Hewasgrantedrefugeestatusbydecision `  oftheImmigrationandRefugeeBoardon11January1996. P  2.2Since1992,thepetitionerwasconvictedofvariouscriminaloffences,includingtheft,uttering 0  threats,assault,willtocausepersonalinjury,falsepretences,sexualassault,obstructingapeace  p  officerandalteringaforgeddocument.Restrainingorderswereissuedagainstthepetitionerin1997 `  and1998.On15January1999,theMinisterofCitizenshipandImmigration'sdelegateissuedan P  opinionpursuanttosections70(5)and53(1)oftheImmigrationActthatthepetitionerconstitutes @  adangertothepublicinCanadaduetothenumberandnatureofcriminalconvictionsacquiredby 0  theapplicantinCanadasince1992.Adeportationorderwasissuedagainstthepetitioneron1March   1999.  2.3On15April1999,thepetitionerfiledanapplicationforleaveandjudicialreviewofthedecision  toremovehimtoIran.TheFederalCourtdismissedtheapplicationon12July2000.TheFederal  Courthaddeniedhisapplicationforleaveandforjudicialreviewofthedecisionthatheconstituted  adangertothepublicon14July1999.Counselsubmitsthatalleffectivedomesticremedieshave p beenexhaustedandthatthepetitionerexpectshisdeportationanytime. ` 2.4ThepetitionerallegesthathefledpersecutioninIraninJuly1990.Hesubmitsthat,inearly @ 1985,whileinhighschool,hehadbeenarrestedandquestionedbyRevolutionaryGuardsabouthis 0 participationinpoliticaldiscussions.ThePetitionerwasheldforeightdaysduringwhichhewas  p beaten,punched,kicked,andtortured.InSeptember1984,thepetitioner'sfamilyhomewasraided ` byRevolutionaryGuardsaftersiblingsleftIranbecauseofperceivedinvolvementwiththepro P monarchistmovement.Thepetitionerallegesthathewasheldfor18daysandthathissister,his @ mother,andhehimselfwerebeaten.InJanuary1985,whileservinginthemilitary,thepetitioner 0 wassuspectedofpoliticalactivityanddetainedandquestionedbyanofficerofthe   Ideological/ReligiousDepartmentoftheArmyfortwodays.Thepetitionersubmitsthathewas ! forcedtowitnesstheexecutionofsixsoldiersconvictedofopposingtheregimeanditswarefforts. "  InApril1985,thepetitionerwaswoundedbyagrenadeandreleasedfromthearmy,aftertreatment #! inamilitaryhospital,inFebruary1986.InOctober1989,thepetitionerwasarrestedby $" RevolutionaryGuards,handcuffedandtakentotheofficesofthebranchofpolicethatdealswith % # antirevolutionaryoffences(Komiteh),wherehewasallegedlybeatenandheldforonemonth.In p&!$ MarchandApril1990,theKomitehagaindetainedthepetitionerfor24hourseachtime.Afterthe `'"% secondarrest,thepetitionerwasorderedtoreportdailytotheKomitehoffice.Thepetitionersubmits P(#& thateverytimehereportedtotheoffice,hewasafraidthatthepoliceofficerswouldkillortorture @)$' him.Afterfourorfivedays,thepetitionerfledtoBandarAbbas,obtainedafalsepassportandfled 0*%( Iranbyplane.In1993asummonswaspublishedintheIraniannewspaper_Khabar_indicatingthat  +p&) thepetitionerhadbeenchargedwithescapeandwasrequestedtoreporttotheInvestigationBranch ,`'* oftheGeneralProsecutor'sOfficeinShiraz. -P(+  -@), 2.5ThepetitionersubmitsthathefearsforhislifeandsafetyifheisreturnedtoIran.Furthermore,  theIranianauthoritieswouldbealertedtohisreturn,becausethepetitionerwouldrequiretravel  documentsissuedbyIran.ThepetitionerallegesthattheStatepartydidnotassesstheriskshefaced  uponhisreturn.Thepetitionerallegesalsothathehasneverbeenassessedfordeterminingthe  likelihoodthathewillcommitmorecrimes. p Thecomplaint P  3.ThepetitionerclaimsthathisforcedreturntoIranwouldviolatearticles3and16ofthe 0  ConventionagainstTortureandOtherInhumanorDegradingTreatmentorPunishment.Heargues  p  thattherearesubstantivegroundsforbelievingthathewouldbeindangerofbeingsubjectedto `  torturewhendeported,becausehehadbeentorturedbeforeheleftIranandbecausehewould P  probablybedetainedandseverelypunishedforhisrefusaltocomplywiththedailyreporting @  obligationsoftheKomiteh.Thepetitionerclaimsfurtherthatrefugeesandrefugeeclaimantsareat 0  riskoftortureupontheirreturntoIran.   Stateparty'sobservationsonadmissibilityandmerits  4.1TheStatepartysubmitsthatthepetitionerhasnotexhaustedalleffectivedomesticremedies.  TheStatepartyarguesthatthepetitionerhasfailedtoseekaministerialexemptiononhumanitarian  andcompassionategroundsundersubsection114(2)oftheCanadianImmigrationActandsection p 2.1ofitsImmigrationRegulations.Thisremedywouldhaveenabledthepetitionertoapplytothe ` MinisteronCitizenshipandImmigrationatanytimeforanexemptionfromtherequirementsofthe P immigrationlegislationorforadmissiontoCanadaoncompassionateorhumanitariangrounds.The @ StatepartyrecallstheearlierfindingsoftheCommitteethathumanitarianandcompassionate 0 applicationsareanavailableandeffectivedomesticremedy1.  p 4.2TheStatepartysubmitsfurtherthatthepetitioner'sclaimofviolationsofhisrightsestablished P byarticles3and16oftheConventionarenotsubstantiated.Thepetitionerdidnotestablishprima @ faciethattherearesubstantialgroundsforbelievingthathisdeportationwouldhavetheforeseeable 0 consequenceofexposinghimtoarealandpersonalriskofbeingtorturedifreturnedtoIran.The   isolatedpastincidentoftorturedoesnotestablishsuchariskoftortureuponhisreturn.TheState ! partyarguesthatthepetitionerhasonlyallegedtohavebeentorturedonoccasionofhisfirst "  detentionin1984,butnotinanyofthesubsequentdetentions.Hislasttwodetentionslastedonly #! for24hoursandthepetitionerwasreleasedwithonlyanobligationtoreportdaily.TheStateparty $" concludesthatthetreatmentofthepetitionerfollowedapatternofdecreasingseverityandthattoday % # heisnotofinterestfortheauthoritiesinIran. p&!$ 4.3TheStatepartysubmitsthatgiventheCommittee'sinterpretationofarticle3asofferingabsolute P(#& protectionirrespectiveofanindividual'spastconduct,thedeterminationoftheriskmustbe @)$' particularlyrigorous.Inthisregard,theStatepartysubmitsthatariskassessmentwasconducted 0*%( whentheMinisterofCitizenshipandImmigration'sdelegateconsideredwhetherthepetitionerwas  +p&) adangertothepublicandshouldberemovedfromCanada.AnewassessmentbytheDepartment ,`'* ofCitizenshipandImmigrationinpreparationoftheresponseoftheStatepartytotheCommittee -P(+ confirmedtheearlierfindingthatthepetitionerisnotatriskoftortureifremovedtoIran.TheState -@), partyargues,inthisregard,thattheCommitteeshouldnotsubstituteitsownfindingsforthoseof  thenationalproceedingssincetheydidnotdiscloseabuseofprocess,badfaith,manifestbiasor  irregularities.ItisforthenationalcourtsoftheStatespartiestoevaluatethefactsandevidencein  aparticularcaseandtheCommitteeshouldnotbecomea"fourthinstance"competenttoreevaluate  findingsoffactorreviewtheapplicationofdomesticlegislation. p 4.4Withregardtotheriskofbeingtortureduponhisreturn,theStatepartysubmitsthatthefacts P  inthepresentpetitionaresimilartothoseincommunicationNo.36/1995,X.v.TheNetherlands. @  Thepetitionerhasnotprovidedanymedicalevidencewithregardtotheallegedilltreatmentin 0  1984.TheStatepartyarguesfurtherthatthepetitionerdidnotindicatethat,afterSeptember1984  p  orbecauseofhisdeparture,anymemberofhisfamilyinIranwerevictimsofretributionbyIranian `  authoritiesbecauseofthepetitioner'sallegedpoliticalopinion.TheStatepartysubmits,inaddition, P  thatthesummonsinitselfdoesnotestablishthatthepetitionerwouldbeatriskofbeingtortured. @  The"noticetoappear"acts,incriminalcases,asanofficialnotificationthattheparticipationofthe 0  personnamedisrequiredinaninvestigation,eitherasawitnessoranaccused.Nothingsupportsthe   conclusionthatthesummonswasissuedforallegedpoliticalcrimes.Furthermore,thepetitionerhas  notprovidedanyevidencethattheIranianauthoritieshaveissuedawarrantforhisarrestduetohis  failuretorespondtothesummons,nordidheindicatethatheisstillobligatedtoreportunderthe  summons.  4.5WithregardtothegeneralsituationinIran,theStatepartysubmitsthatimportantchangeshave p occurredsince1984,includingtheestablishmentofaDepartmentofHumanRightswithinthe ` MinistryofForeignAffairsandoftheIslamicHumanRightsCommissionandtheelectionofMr. P KhatamiasPresident.Furthermore,thelatestCanadianImmigrationandRefugeeBoard's @ publicationonIranhasexplainedthatthesafetyofreturndependsontheinterpretationofgeneral 0 governmentalpolicybylocalauthoritiesand,therefore,themereallegationofariskoftorture  p becausethepetitionerisarefugeeisinsufficienttoestablishthathewouldpersonallyfaceariskof ` torture.TheStatepartyarguesthattheexistenceofapatternofhumanrightsviolationsinacountry P isnotsufficienttodeterminethataparticularpersonwouldbeindangerofbeingsubjectedto @ torture. 0 Commentsbythepetitioner ! 5.1Thepetitionersubmitsthatadecisiontograntaminister'spermitoranexemptionundersection #! 114(2)oftheImmigrationActisentirelydiscretionaryandexecutive.Hewouldnotbeeligiblefor $" landinginCanadaorgiventherequiredminister'spermitbecauseofhisconvictionsforsexual % # assault.ThepetitionersubmitsthattheStatepartywouldnotexerciseitsdiscretioninhisfavour.The p&!$ onlydecisionthepetitionercouldapplytoreviewwouldbethedecisiontoremovehimtoIran.He `'"% filedajudicialreviewonthisveryissue,buttheFederalCourtdeniedhisapplication.Therefore, P(#& counselarguesthattheremediessuggestedbytheStatepartycannotberegardedeffectivedomestic @)$' remedies. 0*%( 5.2ThepetitionerfurthersubmitsthatthecasesreferredbytheStatepartareeithereasily ,`'* distinguishablefromthepresentcaseorentirelyoffthepoint.Hesubmitsthatin_P.Q.L._Ԁv.Canada2, -P(+ theCommitteefoundthatalldomesticremedieshadbeenexhausteddespitethefactthatthe -@), petitionercouldhavemadeanapplicationforhumanitarianandcompassionaterelief.  5.3ThepetitionersubmitsthathesatisfiesthefactorslistedintheCommittee'sgeneralcomment  onarticle3.Furthermore,theCommitteeshouldhavenoconfidenceintheaccuracyoftheoriginal  riskassessmentastheprocessdidnotinvolveanindependentdecisionmaker,anoralhearing,rules p ofevidenceor,atthetimeofthedecisioninthepresentcase,writtenreason.Thesecondrisk `  assessmentwasmadewithouttheknowledgeorparticipationofthepetitionerandreliesalmost P  entirelyontheresearchconductedbyanotherofficeoftheStateparty'simmigrationoffice. @  5.4ThepetitionersubmitsthattheConventionRefugeeDeterminationDivisionacceptedthe  p  allegationsoftorturesetoutinthepetition.ThepetitionerisaConventionrefugeeandwasfound `  tohaveawellfoundedfearofpersecutioninIran.Theconclusionthatthesummonswas,infact, P  a"noticetoappear"isunreliable,sincetheStatepartyreliesoninformationobtainedduringa @  telephoneinterviewwithanunnamedlawyerinTehran,who,apparently,didnotseethesummons. 0  ThepetitionerfurtheraskstheCommitteetoconsiderwhattreatmenthewillreceiveshouldthe   IranianauthoritiesdiscoverthathewasconvictedofsexualassaultinCanada.  5.5WithregardtothegeneralsituationofhumanrightsinIran,thepetitionerpointstoreportsby  HumanRightsWatchin1999andtheUnitedStatesDepartmentofStatein2000andsubmitsthat  whiletherehavebeensomepotentiallypositivedevelopments,littlehaschangedtodateandhuman  rightsconditionsmayhaveactuallydeteriorated. p IssuesandproceedingsbeforetheCommittee P Examinationofadmissibility 0 6.1Beforeconsideringanyclaimscontainedinacommunication,theCommitteeagainstTorture ` mustdecidewhetherornotthecommunicationisadmissibleunderarticle22oftheConvention.The P Committeehasascertained,asitisrequiredtodounderarticle22,paragraph5(a),ofthe @ Convention,thatthesamematterhasnotbeenandisnotbeingexaminedunderanotherprocedure 0 ofinternationalinvestigationorsettlement.   6.2TheCommitteenotesthattheStatepartyconsidersthecommunicationinadmissibleforlackof "  exhaustionofdomesticremedies.Initsriskopinionof11August2000,theDepartmentof #! CitizenshipandImmigrationdeniedariskoftortureifthepetitionerisremovedtoIran;the $" Committeenotesthatthesamegovernmentalbodywoulddetermineadecisiononahumanitarian % # orcompassionateapplicationoraminister'spermit.TheCommitteenotesfurtherthatthepetitioner's p&!$ applicationsforleaveandjudicialreviewofthedecisionstoremovehimtoIranandthathe `'"% constitutesadangertothepublichadbeendeniedbytheFederalCourt;thesamecouldwouldbe P(#& responsibleforreviewingadecisiononahumanitarianorcompassionateapplicationoraminister's @)$' permit.Therefore,theCommitteefindsthat,inthepetitioner'ssituation,ahumanitarianor 0*%( compassionateapplicationundersection114(2)oftheImmigrationActoraminister'spermitwould  +p&) notconstitutearemedylikelytobringrelief,whichshouldstillbeexhaustedforpurposesof ,`'* admissibility.TheCommittee,therefore,considersthattheconditionslaiddowninarticle22, -P(+ paragraph5(b),oftheConventionhavebeenmet. -@), Ї6.3TheCommitteenotesthattheStatepartyconsidersthecommunicationinadmissibleforlackof  sufficientsubstantiation.TheCommitteeisoftheopinionthattheStateparty'sargumentsraiseonly  substantiveissues,whichshouldbedealtwithatthemeritsandnottheadmissibilitystage.Sincethe  Committeeseesnofurtherobstaclestoadmissibility,itdeclaresthecommunicationadmissible.  Considerationofthemerits `  7.1TheissuebeforetheCommitteeiswhethertheremovalofthepetitionertotheIslamicRepublic @  ofIranwouldviolatetheobligationofCanadaunderarticle3oftheConventionnottoexpelor 0  returnapersontoanotherstatewheretherearesubstantialgroundsforbelievingthatheorshewould  p  beindangerofbeingsubjectedtotorture. `  7.2TheCommitteemustdecide,pursuanttoarticle3,paragraph1,oftheConvention,whetherthere @  aresubstantialgroundsforbelievingthattheallegedvictimwouldbeindangerofbeingsubjected 0  totortureuponreturntoIran.Inreachingthisdecision,theCommitteemusttakeintoaccountall   relevantconsiderations,pursuanttoarticle3,paragraph2,oftheConvention,includingtheexistence  ofaconsistentpatternofgross,flagrantormassviolationsofhumanrights.Theaimofthe  termination,however,istoestablishwhethertheindividualconcernedwouldbepersonallyatrisk  ofbeingsubjectedtotortureinthecountrytowhichheorshewouldreturn.Itfollowsthatthe  existenceofaconsistentpatternofgross,flagrantormassviolationsofhumanrightsinacountry  doesnotassuchconstituteasufficientgroundfordeterminingthataparticularpersonwouldbein p dangerofbeingsubjectedtotortureuponhisreturntothatcountry;additionalgroundsmustexist ` toshowthattheindividualconcernedwouldbepersonallyatrisk.Similarly,theabsenceofa P consistentpatternofgrossviolationsofhumanrightsdoesnotmeanthatapersoncannotbe @ consideredtobeindangerofbeingsubjectedtotortureinhisorherspecificcircumstances. 0 7.3Inthepresentcase,theCommitteenotesthatthepetitionerhasclaimedthat,duringhisfirst ` detentioninearly1985,hewastortured.Althoughnotexplicitlycorroboratedbymedicalevidence P ordetainedsubmissionbythepetitioner,theCommitteeispreparedtoconsiderthatthepetitioner @ mayhavebeenmaltreatedduringhisfirstdetention.TheCommitteealsonotesthatthepetitioner 0 hasnotclaimedthathewastorturedduringhissubsequentdetentions.Finally,theCommitteenotes   thattheperiodsofthetwolatestdetentionsin1990wereshort,thatthepetitionerhasnotclaimed ! thathewaseveranactivepoliticalopponentandthatthereisnoindicationthatheisbeingsought "  bytheauthoritiesinIranatthepresenttimeorwouldbeataparticularriskofbeingtorturedfor #! reasonofhisCanadiancriminalrecord.Therefore,theCommitteeconsidersthatthepetitionerhas $" notsubstantiatedhisclaimthathewillbepersonallyatriskofbeingsubjectedtotortureifheis % # returnedtoIran. p&!$ 7.4Withregardtotheallegedviolationofarticle16oftheConvention,theCommitteenotesthat P(#& article3oftheConventiondoesnotencompasssituationsofilltreatmentenvisagedbyarticle16, @)$' andfurtherfindsthatthepetitionerhasnotsubstantiatedaclaimthathewouldfacesuchtreatment 0*%( uponreturntoIranaswouldconstitutecruel,inhumanordegradingtreatmentorpunishmentwith  +p&) themeaningofarticle1oftheConvention. ,`'* _ -@), Conclusions  8.TheCommitteeagainstTorture,actingunderarticle22,paragraph7,oftheConventionagainst  TortureandOtherCruel,InhumanorDegradingTreatmentorPunishment,concludesthatthe  removalof_B.S._ԀtotheIslamicRepublicofIran,onthebasisoftheinformationsubmitted,wouldnot p entailabreachofarticles3and16oftheConvention. `  Notes @  1󀀀TheStatepartymakesreferenceto_P._ԀS.S.v.Canada,caseNo.66/1997;R.K.v.Canada,case  p  No.42/1996;___L._Ԁ_O._Ԁ_v._ԀCanada,caseNo.95/1997. `  2󀀀CaseNo.57/1996. @  =