CRPD/C/22/D/24/2014
initiative of the victim or the victim’s family or upon their offer of proof, without an
effective search for the truth by the Government. In other words, the obligation to
investigate, prosecute and punish the persons liable for human rights violations is a nondelegable duty of the State.3
The complaint
3.1
The author claims that she has been a victim of violations of her rights under articles
5, 6, 8, 10, 14, 15 (1), 16 and 17 of the Convention.
3.2
Regarding article 5, she claims that she has been discriminated against on the basis
of her disability due to the State party’s failure to take care of persons with albinism. She
argues that her attack is an illustration of a systematic practice against persons with
albinism. She considers that if the State party had taken preventive measures to protect
persons with albinism, she would not have suffered such an attack.
3.3
The author argues that the State party has failed to take measures to protect women
with disabilities and guarantee their rights and empowerment, as required by article 6 of the
Convention.
3.4
The author further considers that she has been a victim of a violation of her rights
under article 8 of the Convention, since the State party does not carry out public awareness
campaigns to ensure that the public understands the rights of persons with albinism.
Albinism, as a disability, seems to have been intentionally ignored by the State party
authorities. In this connection, the author submits that the inhabitants of her village felt that
she had brought shame to the village because she had sought justice. She argues that this
perception demonstrates the prevailing ignorance about the rights of persons with
disabilities, and that the authorities have failed to take action in that regard.
3.5
The author submits that the State party has failed to take measures of protection for
persons with albinism, and that this failure amounts to a violation of her rights under article
10 of the Convention. She argues that, had the State party complied with the requirements
of the Convention, her aggressors would not have dared to attack her.
3.6
The author also considers that the State party has failed to provide the necessary
security to enable persons with albinism to enjoy life, in violation of article 14 of the
Convention.
3.7
The author argues that the State party has failed to protect her from violence and
torture. She has suffered double jeopardy, first as a woman and then as a person with
albinism. She submits that cutting off her arms clearly amounts to torture and degrading
treatment, in violation of her rights under article 15 (1) of the Convention.
3.8
The author considers that the State party has failed to ensure that persons with
albinism are protected from exploitation, violence and abuse, and that impunity remains for
all related crimes, while such practices are widespread and the authorities are aware of them.
She therefore considers that the State party has violated her rights under article 16 of the
Convention.
3.9
The author also alleges that, as a result, her physical integrity has not been respected.
Given that the State party has failed to take any measures to protect persons with albinism
against such practices or to create effective protection and deterrence mechanisms, the State
party has violated its obligations under article 17 of the Convention. 4
3
4
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Arges Sequeira Mangas v. Nicaragua, Report No.
52/97, Case No. 11.218 (18 February 1998), para. 96.
The author also submits that she has been a victim of violations of her rights under the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the
Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. These allegations do
not fall within the competence ratione materiae of the Committee and are therefore not referred to.
3