Under article 3, States must ensure that no one is subjected to torture or ill-treatment. In E.G. v Moldova, the ECtHR found that rape and aggravated sexual assault fall within the scope of article 3, and also impact the right to private life under article 8.¹⁷

To fall within the scope of article 3, any ill-treatment ‘must attain a minimum level of severity’.¹⁸ This minimum depends on all the circumstances of the case, ‘such as the nature and context of the treatment, its duration, its physical and mental effects and, in some instances, the sex, age and state of health of the victim’.¹⁹ Treatment is inhuman when it was ‘premeditated, was applied for hours at a stretch and caused either actual bodily injury or intense physical or mental suffering’.²⁰ It is degrading when it humiliates or debases an individual, in disregard of their human dignity, or causes fear, anguish or inferiority that may break an individual’s moral and physical resistance.²¹

There is a distinction in article 3 between torture and ill-treatment,²² which allows the special stigma of torture to attach only to deliberate inhuman treatment causing very serious and cruel suffering.²³

In Aydin v Turkey, which concerned serious disturbances in the south-east of Turkey between security forces and members of the Workers’ Party of Kurdistan,²⁴ the applicant had been detained by security forces and raped while in custody, and subjected to various forms of ill-treatment.²⁵ The ECtHR held that rape of a detainee by a State official is ‘an especially grave and abhorrent form of ill-treatment’ given the ‘vulnerability and weakened resistance’ of the victim.²⁶ The ECtHR considered both the psychological and physical pain caused by rape, stating that:

• Rape leaves deep psychological scars on the victim/survivor which are unlikely to lessen over time;²⁷
• In this case, rape had also caused ‘acute physical pain of forced penetration’, which left the applicant ‘feeling debased and violated both physically and emotionally’.²⁸

The ECtHR found that the especially cruel act of rape to which the applicant was subjected amounted to torture.²⁹

‘Within their jurisdiction’. Under article 1, States Parties must secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms enshrined in the ECHR. The ECtHR has found that under article 1, read together with article 3, States must ensure that individuals within their jurisdiction are not subjected to torture or ill-treatment,³⁰ including that perpetrated by private individuals.³¹

States should prevent ill-treatment of which the authorities had or should have had knowledge, and provide effective protection, ‘in particular of children and other vulnerable persons’.³² In the case of vulnerable persons, including persons with disabilities, States should be vigilant and provide increased protection, given that such individuals’ capacity or willingness to pursue a complaint ‘will often be impaired’.³³

The ECtHR has found that States, under articles 3 and 8, must effectively criminalise and ‘deter the commission of offences against personal integrity’.³⁴ In particular, States must criminalise rape³⁵ and all non-consensual sexual acts.³⁶

CRSV perpetrated by private individuals. Under article 8, States should protect everyone’s right to respect for their private and family life against acts of private actors.³⁷

While States have discretion in how to provide protection against acts of individuals in breach of article 8, States must enact efficient criminal law provisions to ensure ‘effective deterrence against grave acts such as rape’.³⁸

CRSV in the form of trafficking. States must ensure ‘the practical and effective protection of the rights of victims or potential victims of trafficking’ in national legislation.³⁹ Under article 4, which prohibits slavery and forced labour, States must penalise and prosecute effectively slavery, servitude or forced or compulsory labour.⁴⁰

States have a wide degree of discretion in how to ensure adequate protection against rape due to cultural perceptions, local circumstances and traditional approaches.⁴¹ However, the ECHR imposes limits on States’ discretion.⁴²

‘[A]ny rigid approach to the prosecution of sexual offences, such as requiring proof of physical resistance in all circumstances, risks leaving certain types of rape unpunished’ and may jeopardise the individual’s sexual autonomy. Under articles 3 and 8, States must criminalise any non-consensual sexual act, ‘including in the absence of physical resistance by the victim’.⁴³

Lack of consent. In M.C. v Bulgaria, the ECtHR noted that, in international criminal law:

• Force is not an element of rape;
• Taking advantage of coercive circumstances to commit sexual acts is punishable;
• Sexual penetration without the victim’s consent constitutes rape;
• Consent must be given voluntarily, as a result of the person’s free will, ‘assessed in the context of the surrounding circumstances’.⁴⁴

While this definition was formulated in the context of rapes committed against persons in armed conflict, the ECtHR found that it reflected ‘a universal trend towards regarding lack of consent as the essential element of rape and sexual abuse’.⁴⁵

Under article 14, States must secure the rights and freedoms set out in the ECHR ‘without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status’, including sexual orientation,⁴⁶ disability,⁴⁷ age,⁴⁸ marital status⁴⁹ and membership of an organisation,⁵⁰ among others. The ECtHR has considered language, religion, nationality, and cultural and traditional origins to be ‘related and overlapping’,⁵¹ indicating an acknowledgement that grounds of discrimination are connected.

In their implementation of the ECHR, States should be particularly considerate of the needs of individuals the ECtHR has deemed ‘vulnerable’, such as children.⁵²

Vulnerability denotes individuals who, by virtue of different grounds of discrimination, are more exposed to both direct and indirect violation of their rights.⁵³ For example, the ECtHR in De Donder et De Clippel considered that the applicants’ son, as a person deprived of his liberty and with mental disorders, was doubly vulnerable.⁵⁴ In B.S. v Spain, the ECtHR similarly determined that the Spanish courts had failed ‘to take account of the applicant’s particular vulnerability inherent in her position as an African woman working as a prostitute’, and found a violation of both articles 3 and 14.⁵⁵

Case study: De Donder et De Clippel. The applicants were the parents of Tom De Clippel, who had committed suicide in a Belgian prison. Tom had previously resided in psychiatric institutions, had drug problems and mental disorders, was schizophrenic, and had attempted suicide several times.⁵⁶ After being found guilty of car theft, Tom was placed on probation and ordered to attend medical appointments under a “resocialisation” plan. Because of his non-compliance with the plan, Tom was sent to the prison’s psychiatric wing and, after an altercation with his cellmate, was placed in solitary confinement, where he later committed suicide.⁵⁷

In light of the fact that detainees are in a vulnerable situation and the authorities must protect them, and that persons with mental disorders are similarly at risk, the ECtHR found that the risk that Tom would commit suicide was immediate and certain.⁵⁸ Additionally, the authorities knew or should have known that this risk existed. First, the ECtHR agreed with a psychiatrist’s statement that, among people who have schizophrenia, the risk of suicide is well-known and high. Secondly, the Belgian court had ordered Tom detained on the basis of a medical report which described him as a danger to himself. Lastly, the seriousness of Tom’s mental disorders could not be disputed. Together, these elements led the ECtHR to conclude that the authorities had been alerted to Tom’s vulnerability.⁵⁹

Having determined that the risk was real and immediate, and that the authorities knew of it, the ECtHR considered whether Belgium had failed to prevent Tom’s suicide. The authorities had placed Tom in an ordinary prison environment despite recognising that, under domestic law, he was entitled to internment under psycho-medical supervision. Tom was not seen by a psychiatrist upon arriving at the prison. Additionally, the authorities had made Tom share a cell with three other people, notwithstanding that his schizophrenia made him unfit to share a confined and cramped space. Lastly, the authorities had put Tom in solitary confinement as punishment. Together, these elements allowed the ECtHR to establish that Belgium had not only failed to take all reasonable measures to prevent the risk that Tom would commit suicide, but had also contributed to it, in violation of article 2 on the right to life.⁶⁰

Under article 3, States must take measures to protect persons who are deprived of their liberty from torture and ill-treatment.⁶¹ Where an individual is under State custody, the absence of any direct State involvement in acts of torture or ill-treatment does not absolve the State from its obligations under article 3.⁶²

While article 3 does not require the State to guarantee, through the legal system, that torture and ill-treatment are never inflicted ‘by one individual on another’, the State must at least effectively protect persons within its jurisdiction, including preventing ill-treatment of which State authorities had or should have had knowledge.⁶³

States must keep persons deprived of liberty in conditions which:

• Are compatible with their human dignity;
• Do not cause them distress or hardship of an intensity exceeding the suffering inherent in detention;
• Adequately secure their health and well-being.⁶⁴

States have a right to control the entry, residence and expulsion of non-citizens and non-nationals in accordance with international law.⁶⁵ However, under article 3, States may not deport such persons to a country where there are substantial grounds for believing that a person faces a real risk of being subjected to torture or ill-treatment in that country.⁶⁶

To determine whether there is a risk of torture or ill-treatment, the ECtHR examines the foreseeable consequences of sending an individual to a specific country, taking into account the situation there and their personal circumstances.⁶⁷ The ECtHR has not ruled out the possibility that article 3 applies when the risks come from persons who are not public officials, but ‘it must be shown that the risk is real’ and that the authorities of the receiving State are unable to provide protection against that risk.⁶⁸

Under article 3, States must effectively criminalise and ‘deter the commission of offences against personal integrity’.⁶⁹ States must also establish law enforcement machinery capable of providing practical and effective protection against torture and ill-treatment. This way, when a person raises an arguable complaint under article 3, the authorities can conduct an effective investigation, even if the ill-treatment has been inflicted by private individuals.⁷⁰

The ECtHR has defined essential criteria to assess the effectiveness of an investigation:

• States must promptly begin and conduct investigations,⁷¹ as soon as the facts have been brought to the authorities’ attention.⁷² Lack of action on the authorities’ part to justify the time-barring of criminal proceedings is a breach of article 3;⁷³
• As allegations under article 3 ‘must be supported by appropriate evidence’,⁷⁴ authorities must take all available, reasonable measures to obtain evidence relating to the alleged offence.⁷⁵ Where evidence is collected through medical examination of the victim/survivor, States must ensure that the examination is conducted ‘with all appropriate sensitivity’, by medical professionals who are competent in this area and whose independence is not affected by the prosecuting authority;⁷⁶
• States must ensure that investigations are objective and impartial, and lead to the establishment of the facts. Investigations must make it possible to identify and, if necessary, punish those responsible. This is not an obligation of result, but one of means;⁷⁷
• The investigation must be thorough and authorities must always make a serious attempt to find out what happened;⁷⁸
• The investigation must be independent from those implicated in the events;⁷⁹
• The investigation must be accessible to the complainant at all stages.⁸⁰

Under article 3, States must also prosecute offenders, when appropriate.⁸¹ Not all prosecutions need to result in conviction, or in a particular sentence. However, national courts must not, under any circumstances, ‘allow physical or psychological suffering to go unpunished’.⁸²

States must act with due diligence when sexual violence has been committed against persons at risk: in E.B. v Romania, the ECtHR considered that the victim’s intellectual disability ‘placed her in a heightened state of vulnerability’. The investigating authorities and the domestic courts should have shown increased diligence in analysing her statements.⁸³ Failure to properly investigate or provide appropriate judicial response to ‘complaints of sexual abuse against children or other vulnerable persons such as persons with intellectual disabilities’ fosters impunity, which may be in breach of article 3.⁸⁴

The rights of victims/survivors who are parties to criminal proceedings could engage article 8.⁸⁵ While the main purpose of article 8 is to protect an individual’s right to respect for his private and family life, article 8(2) also stipulates that public authorities must not interfere with the exercise of this right.

Under article 8, States must not only refrain from interfering, but also adopt measures to prevent interference with an individual’s private and family life.⁸⁶ In the course of criminal proceedings, States must ensure that the life, liberty or security of witnesses, and in particular of victims/survivors called to testify, are not unduly endangered.⁸⁷

Criminal proceedings play a crucial role in the institutional response to gender-based violence and in the fight against gender inequality.⁸⁸ However, the ECtHR has observed that criminal proceedings are often experienced as an ordeal by victims/survivors of sexual violence, especially when forced to confront the accused against their will, and also in cases involving minors.⁸⁹ In these circumstances, the State may take special measures to protect the victims/survivors,⁹⁰ including adequate care to protect them from secondary victimisation.⁹¹ The State must also conduct proceedings in a prompt and speedy manner, to avoid unnecessary delay.⁹²

Judicial authorities must avoid reproducing gender stereotypes in court decisions, downplaying gender-based violence and exposing women to secondary victimisation by using guilt-inducing and moralistic language that discourages victims/survivors’ trust in justice.⁹³ To protect alleged victims/survivors of gender-based violence, States must also protect their image, dignity and privacy, including through the non-disclosure of information and personal data unrelated to the facts.⁹⁴ While judges, due to their discretionary power and the principle of judicial independence, may express themselves freely in decisions, they have a prevailing obligation to protect the image and privacy of victims/survivors ‘from any unjustified infringement’.⁹⁵

On the requirement of prompt proceedings: S.Z. v Bulgaria and W. v Slovenia.⁹⁶ In S.Z., the applicant was a Bulgarian national. In 1999, she had been held in a flat against her will, and beaten and raped by several men. The police investigation had been closed four times, and the case sent back for further investigation following procedural irregularities. When a trial finally took place, ten of the twenty-two hearings were adjourned on the basis of irregularities. It took the domestic courts 5 years to convict five of the seven accused. Of the other two, one was acquitted and the proceedings against the other were declared time-barred as a result of the delay.⁹⁷

In the case of W., the applicant had been raped by a group of seven males, some of whom had been minors at the time. The applicant began criminal proceedings in 1990. The case was delayed for more than a decade, as a few of the accused had emigrated to Austria and the Slovenian courts had not conducted inquiries into their whereabouts in a prompt manner. It was not until 2004 that the applicant was able to obtain a verdict against the last of the accused.⁹⁸

In S.Z., the ECtHR found that the excessive length of the proceedings had negative repercussions on the applicant, who was not only ‘psychologically very vulnerable’ as a result of the rape, but also left in a state of uncertainty as to whether her assailants would be punished. Additionally, the numerous hearings forced her to constantly relive the traumatic event.⁹⁹ In W., the ECtHR similarly considered that the lengthy criminal proceedings, from the beginning of the investigation to the three separate retrials, resulted in prolonged uncertainty and caused the applicant unnecessary suffering and frustration, which could have been avoided had the Slovenian authorities conducted the proceedings in an effective and prompt manner.¹⁰⁰

In both cases, the ECtHR accordingly determined that the authorities’ failure to conduct proceedings in a prompt manner, and the suffering caused by such a failure, resulted in a violation of article 3.¹⁰¹

Amnesties and pardons are generally not contrary to international law, except when they concern serious violations of fundamental human rights, including when committed by private individuals.¹⁰²

States should not grant amnesties and pardons in cases of torture or ill-treatment.¹⁰³ In E.G. v Moldova, the ECtHR held that the sexual violence the applicant suffered amounted to a serious infringement of her right to physical and moral integrity, and that the State had breached articles 3 and 8 by granting amnesty to one of the perpetrators.¹⁰⁴

Under article 13, everyone whose rights and freedoms under the ECHR have been violated must have an effective remedy before a national authority.¹⁰⁵ States must empower national authorities to deal with the substance of a complaint and to grant appropriate relief. While States have some discretion in how to implement article 13,¹⁰⁶ the remedy must be effective in practice and in law. States must not unjustifiably hinder remedies with their acts or omissions.¹⁰⁷

In particular, States must provide victims/survivors of torture and ill-treatment with remedy, including when committed by private individuals.¹⁰⁸ If an individual credibly claims that they have been tortured by agents of the State, the State must provide that individual with an effective remedy that entails compensation, where appropriate, and conduct a thorough and effective investigation to identify and punish those responsible with the complainant’s participation.¹⁰⁹

Under article 4(1)), States must adopt measures to promote and protect the right of women to live free from violence in both the public and private spheres.

Under articles 7(1) and 12(2), States must implement State-wide, adequately funded¹¹⁰ policies to prevent and combat all forms of violence against women and domestic violence by any natural or legal person, including ‘State authorities, officials, agents, institutions and other actors acting on behalf of the State’ and ‘non-State actors’.¹¹¹

Under article 36, States must criminalise ‘the following intentional conducts’, including when committed against former or current spouses or partners as recognised by domestic law:

1. Engaging in non-consensual vaginal, anal or oral penetration of a sexual nature of another person’s body with any bodily part or object;
2. Engaging in other non-consensual acts of a sexual nature with a person; and
3. Causing another person to engage in non-consensual acts of a sexual nature with a third person.

Forced marriage. Under article 37, States must criminalise:

• Intentionally forcing an adult or a child to enter into a marriage;
• Intentionally luring an adult or a child to the territory of a Party or State other than the one they reside in to force them to enter into a marriage.

States must ensure that ‘marriages concluded under force’ are voidable, annulled or dissolved ‘without undue financial or administrative burden placed on the victim’.¹¹²

Forced abortion and forced sterilisation. Under article 39, States must criminalise the following intentional conducts:

1. Performing an abortion on a woman without her prior and informed consent;
2. Performing surgery which results in a woman’s sterilisation without her prior and informed consent or understanding of the procedure.

Sexual harassment. Under article 40, States must sanction, criminally or otherwise, any form of unwanted verbal, non-verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature violating a person’s dignity.

Aiding or abetting and attempt. Under article 41, States must criminalise aiding or abetting the intentional commission of or attempts to commit violence against women or domestic violence.

Reservations. States may not make reservations in respect of any provision of the Istanbul Convention, with the exception of:

• Article 30(2) on States’ provision of compensation to victims/survivors;
• Article 44, paragraphs (1)(e), (3) and (4) on measures to establish jurisdiction over acts of violence against women and domestic violence;
• Article 55(1) on the necessity (or lack thereof) of victim/survivors’ complaints in respect of article 35 regarding minor offences;
• Article 58 on statutes of limitations in respect of articles 37 (forced marriage), 38 (female genital mutilation) and 39 (forced abortion and forced sterilisation);
• Article 59 on victims/survivors’ residence status.

Under article 4(3), States must implement the Istanbul Convention, in particular measures to protect victims/survivors’ rights, ‘without discrimination on any ground such as sex, gender, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth, sexual orientation, gender identity, age, state of health, disability, marital status, migrant or refugee status, or other status’.

Under article 12(3), States must ensure that all measures to prevent violence against women and domestic violence are victim-centred, and consider and address ‘the specific needs of persons made vulnerable by particular circumstances. Similarly, under article 18(3), States must ensure that measures for the protection and support of victims/survivors address the specific needs of and are available to ‘vulnerable persons, including child victims’.

In the determination of perpetrators’ sentences, States should consider as ‘aggravating circumstances’ the fact that the victim/survivor of violence against women and/or domestic violence is a vulnerable person.¹¹³

Under article 60, States must recognise gender-based violence against women as a form of persecution within the meaning of the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, and as a form of serious harm giving rise to protection. States must give a gender-sensitive interpretation to each of the 1951 Convention grounds (i.e., ‘race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion’) giving rise to protection.¹¹⁴

Further, States must develop gender-sensitive reception procedures and support services for asylum-seekers, ‘as well as gender guidelines and gender-sensitive asylum procedures’.

Non-refoulement. Under article 61, States must refrain from returning victims/survivors of violence against women who are in need of protection, regardless of their status or residence, ‘to any country where their life would be at risk or where they might be subjected to torture or [ill-treatment]’.

Residence status. Following the dissolution of an intimate relationship, States must provide ‘victims whose residence status depends on that of the spouse or partner’ and who are in particularly difficult circumstances with ‘an autonomous residence permit’ irrespective of the marriage or the relationship’ duration.¹¹⁵

Under article 12(1), States must promote social and cultural changes in society to eradicate ‘prejudices, customs, traditions, and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority of women or on stereotyped roles for women and men’.

Under article 13, in co-operation with national human rights institutions and equality bodies, civil society and non-governmental organisations, especially women’s organisations, States must regularly and widely promote or conduct awareness-raising campaigns or programmes to increase societal awareness and understanding of the different forms of violence against women and domestic violence, ‘their consequences on children and the need to prevent such violence’. States must widely disseminate information on available measures to prevent violence against women and domestic violence.

Under article 14, States must also disseminate teaching material on issues ‘such as equality between women and men, non-stereotyped gender roles, mutual respect, non-violent conflict resolution in interpersonal relationships, gender-based violence against women and the right to personal integrity’. States must do so in ‘informal educational facilities, as well as in sports, cultural and leisure facilities and the media’ and, if possible, with the participation of ‘the private sector, the information and communication technology sector and the media’.¹¹⁶

Training of professionals. Under article 15, States must introduce or strengthen appropriate training for professionals working with victims/survivors or perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence. Trainings must address ‘the prevention and detection of such violence, equality between women and men, the needs and rights of victims’, co-ordinated multi-agency co-operation on how to comprehensively and appropriately handle referrals in cases of violence, as well as how to prevent secondary victimisation.

Under article 62, States must conclude agreements and co-operate with one another for the purpose of:

1. Preventing, combating and prosecuting all forms of violence against women and domestic violence;
2. Protecting and providing assistance to victims/survivors;
3. Investigations or proceedings concerning violence against women and domestic violence. States must allow victims/survivors of violence against women or domestic violence committed in the territory of a State other than the one where they reside to ‘make a complaint before the competent authorities of their State of residence’;
4. Enforcing civil and criminal judgments issued by States’ judicial authorities, including protection orders.

States must undertake to regularly collect disaggregated statistical data on cases of violence against women and domestic violence, and support research to study their root causes and effects, ‘incidences and conviction rates, as well as the efficacy of measures taken to implement’ the Istanbul Convention.¹¹⁷

States must make this information available to the public,¹¹⁸ and provide it to GREVIO ‘to stimulate international co-operation and enable international benchmarking’.¹¹⁹ Under article 68, States must provide GREVIO with a report on legislative and other measures adopted to give effect to the Istanbul Convention.

Under article 10, States must establish one or more official bodies to co-ordinate, implement, monitor and evaluate policies and measures to prevent and combat violence against women and domestic violence. These bodies must co-ordinate data collection, and analyse and disseminate its results.

Under article 49, States must conduct investigations and judicial proceedings concerning violence against women and domestic violence ‘without undue delay’, taking into consideration the rights of the victim/survivor ‘during all stages of the criminal proceedings’, and having regard to the gendered nature of such violence.

States must not make the investigation and prosecution of violence against women and domestic violence wholly dependent upon a report or complaint filed by a victim/survivor. The proceedings should continue even if the victim/survivor withdraws their statement or complaint.¹²⁰

States must prosecute all acts of violence against women and domestic violence when the victim/survivor is a national or has their habitual residence in the State’s territory,¹²¹ and the acts have been committed:

1. In their territory; or
2. By one of their nationals; or
3. By a person who has their habitual residence in the State’s territory.¹²²

States must prosecute such offences, regardless of whether the offences were already criminalised in the territory in which they were committed. Further, States cannot delay prosecution until they receive information about the offences’ place of commission, or the victim/survivor reports the offences.¹²³

States must make violence against women and domestic violence punishable ‘by effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions’. These sanctions must include, where appropriate, ‘sentences involving the deprivation of liberty which can give rise to extradition’.¹²⁴

Unacceptable justifications for crimes, including crimes committed in the name of so-called “honour”. Under article 42, States may not treat ‘culture, custom, religion, tradition or so-called “honour”‘ as justification for violence against women and domestic violence. This obligation covers, in particular, claims that the victim ‘has transgressed cultural, religious, social or traditional norms or customs of appropriate behaviour’.

Under article 56, States must take measures ‘to protect the rights and interests of victims, including their special needs as witnesses, at all stages of investigations and judicial proceedings, in particular by’:

1. Ensuring their protection, as well as that of their families and witnesses, from intimidation, retaliation and repeat victimisation;
2. Ensuring that victims/survivors and their family are informed when the perpetrator escapes or is released temporarily or definitively;
3. Informing victims/survivors of their rights and the services at their disposal and the follow-up to their complaint, the charges, the investigation’s or proceedings’ general progress, and their role in them, as well as the outcome of their case;
4. Enabling victims/survivors to be heard, to supply evidence, and have their views, needs and concerns presented, directly or through an intermediary, and considered;
5. Providing victims/survivors with appropriate support services so that their rights and interests are duly presented and taken into account;
6. Ensuring that measures may be adopted to protect victims/survivors’ privacy and image;
7. Avoiding contact between victims/survivors and perpetrators within court and law enforcement agency premises;
8. Providing victims/survivors with independent and competent interpreters when they are parties to proceedings or supplying evidence;
9. Enabling victims/survivors to testify in the courtroom without being present or without the presence of the alleged perpetrator, for example through the use of communication technologies.

States must provide victims/survivors of violence against women and domestic violence with access to justice. Measures to facilitate this include:

• Enshrining the principle of equality between women and men in national constitutions or other legislation, and ensuring its practical realisation;
• Prohibiting discrimination against women, including through the use of sanctions;
• Abolishing laws and practices that discriminate against women;¹²⁵
• Allowing governmental and non-governmental organisations and domestic violence counsellors to assist and/or support victims/survivors, at their request, during investigations and judicial proceedings;¹²⁶
• Providing ‘for the right to legal assistance and to free legal aid for victims’;¹²⁷
• Providing victims/survivors with ‘information on available support services and legal measures in a language they understand’;¹²⁸
• Providing victims/survivors with information on and access to applicable regional and international individual/collective complaints mechanisms. States must promote ‘the provision of sensitive and knowledgeable assistance to victims in presenting any such complaints’;¹²⁹
• Prohibiting the referral of acts of violence against women and domestic violence to ‘alternative dispute resolution processes, including mediation and conciliation’;¹³⁰
• Ensuring that statutes of limitation ‘allow for the efficient initiation of proceedings after the victim has reached the age of majority’.¹³¹

Under article 18, States must take ‘measures to protect all victims from any further acts of violence’.

Measures to protect victims/survivors include:

• Access to services ‘facilitating their recovery from violence’, including ‘legal and psychological counselling, financial assistance, housing, education, training and assistance in finding employment’;
• Access to adequately resourced health care and social services provided by professionals ‘trained to assist victims’;¹³²
• Immediate, short- and long-term specialist support services to any victim/survivor in an adequate geographical distribution;¹³³
• Appropriate, easily accessible shelters in sufficient numbers to provide safe accommodation for and pro-actively reach out to victims/survivors, especially women and their children;¹³⁴
• State-wide round-the-clock (24/7) confidential telephone helplines free of charge to provide advice to callers;¹³⁵
• Easily accessible and sufficient rape crisis or sexual violence referral centres to provide victims/survivors with medical and forensic examination, trauma support and counselling;¹³⁶
• Protection and support services to victims/survivors that duly consider the rights, needs and best interests of child witnesses, including age-appropriate psychosocial counselling;¹³⁷
• Encouraging any person witness to acts of violence against women or who has reasonable grounds to believe that such acts may be committed, or that further acts of violence are to be expected, to report this to the competent organisations or authorities;¹³⁸
• Allowing professionals working with victims/survivors to contact the competent organisations or authorities if they have reasonable grounds to believe that a serious act of violence has been committed and further serious acts of violence are to be expected, notwithstanding confidentiality rules.¹³⁹

Such measures must:

• Be based on a gendered understanding of violence against women and domestic violence, and must focus on the victim/survivor’s human rights and safety;
• Consider the relationship between victims/survivors, perpetrators, children and their wider social environment;
• Aim at avoiding secondary victimisation;
• Aim at the empowerment and economic independence of women victims/survivors of violence;
• Allow, where appropriate, for a range of protection and support services to be located on the same premises;
• Address the specific needs of and be available to vulnerable persons, including child victims/survivors.¹⁴⁰

Under article 29, States must provide victims/survivors with adequate civil remedies against perpetrators. They must also do so when State authorities have failed to take the necessary preventive or protective measures.

Further, States must ensure that victims/survivors of violence against women and domestic violence have the right to claim compensation from perpetrators. Where the damage cannot be covered by the perpetrator, insurance or State-funded health and social provisions, States must promptly award adequate compensation to those who have sustained serious bodily injury or health impairment.¹⁴¹