7.4 委员会忆及关于《公约》第 3 条的执行的第 1 号一般性意见(1997 年)，这项意见指出，在评估遭受酷刑的危险时，绝不能仅仅依据理论或怀疑。尽管危险并非必须符合“高度可能”这一检验标准，但委员会指出，举证责任通常在申诉人，申诉人必须提出可论证的理由，证明本人面临可预见的、真实的危险。7 委员会指出，根据第 1 号一般性意见，委员会对有关缔约国机关的事实调查结果给予相当大的重视，但同时，委员会不受这些调查结果的约束，而且根据《公约》第 22 条第 4 款，有权根据每起案件的详细案情，自行评估所涉事实。
7.4 The Committee recalls its general comment No. 1 (1997) on the implementation of article 3 of the Convention, according to which the risk of torture must be assessed on grounds that go beyond mere theory or suspicion. While the risk does not have to meet the test of being highly probable, the Committee recalls that the burden of proof generally falls on the complainant, who must present an arguable case that he or she faces a foreseeable, real and personal risk.7 The Committee recalls that, under the terms of general comment No. 1, it gives considerable weight to findings of fact that are made by organs of the State party concerned, while at the same time it is not bound by such findings and has the power, provided by article 22 (4), of the Convention, of free assessment of the facts based upon the full set of circumstances in every case.