CEDAW/C/68/D/91/2015 1. The author of the communication is O.G., a national of the Russian Federation born in 1985. She claims to be a victim of violations by the Russian Federation of her rights under articles 1, 2 (b)–(g), read in conjunction with the Committee’s general recommendations No. 19 (1992) on violence against women and No. 28 (2010) on the core obligations of States parties under article 2 of the Convention, and articles 3 and 5 (a) of the Convention. The Russian Federation ratified the Convention and the Optional Protocol thereto on 23 January 1981 and 28 July 2004, respectively. The author is represented by counsel. Facts as submitted by the author 2.1 The author was in a civil partnership with K. from 2008 to 2010. During that time K. allegedly used psychoactive substances and alcohol and insulted the author. He also had a gambling addiction. For those reasons, the author left him. In late 2010, she began living with another partner. Nevertheless, K. continued to call the author, demanded that their relationship should continue, sent offensive text messages, visited the building in which she lived and insisted on entering her flat. Because of the psychological harassment and K.’s obsessive behaviour, the author stopped communicating with him. 2.2 On 4 December 2011, at around 7 p.m., K. came to the author ’s house and demanded that she should let him in. When the author refused, he hit her in the face in front of her son and the author ’s partner. Afterwards, he ran outside and broke the author’s window with a stone. 2.3 On 20 December 2011, the author approached the Crisis Centre for Women, a non-governmental organization in Saint Petersburg, to report the events. She was offered legal aid. On 21 February 2013, K. was found guilty by Magistrate ’s Court No. 1 of the Admiralteysky District of having committed a crime under article 116 (1) of the Criminal Code (battery) and was sentenced to four months of corr ective labour with 5 per cent of his income to be withheld by the Government. Under article 73 of the Criminal Code, his sentence was suspended with a six-month probationary period. 1 He was also ordered to compensate the author for the moral damage caused to her in the amount of 3,000 roubles (around $50). 2.4 On 23 February 2013, K. repeatedly sent the author text messages containing insults and threats that he would catch her and kill her and her partner. On 24 February 2013, the author filed a criminal complaint at the local police station. On 7 March 2013, the police officer in charge of the complaint issued an official decision refusing to initiate a criminal investigation on the grounds that he could not interrogate K. because the latter would not come to the police station and, because he was not backing up his threats with action, the author ’s life was not in danger. 2.5 On 20 May 2013, K. sent another text message to the author, telling her to “come home faster, I am waiting for you here by the door ”. The author immediately called the police and reported the threat. Neverthe less, the police called back 10 minutes later and said that they had talked to K. by telephone and that he had promised that he would leave her alone. Some 90 minutes later, the a uthor received another insulting text message from K. __________________ 1 2/12 Article 73 of the Criminal Code states that, if by imposing corrective labour, restriction in military service, service in a disciplinary military unit or deprivation of liberty for a term of up to eight years, a court of law arrives at the conclusion that it is possible to rehabilitate the convicted person without his actually serving punishment, then the court shall decree that the imposed penalty be suspended. Conditional sentences shall not be given to persons convicted for offences against the sexual integrity of minors under 14 years old. 17-21669

Select target paragraph3