standards found in international and regional instruments, General Comments, and other soft laws for the Committee’s consideration. VI. Issues for investigation by the ACERWC 29. Following the arguments made by all the parties involved in the Communication, the Committee has framed the following issues as matters of deliberation and investigation to inform its Decision: a) Whether the Respondent State has adopted a policy and practice which has resulted in forced pregnancy testing of schoolgirls and the expulsion of pregnant and married girls from schools with no re-entry opportunities; b) Whether the act of the Respondent State is a violation of the various rights of children and its state obligations in the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child; and c) Whether the applicants are entitled to any remedies. VII. The Committee’s analysis on the merits of the alleged violations The Committee considers and analyses the alleged violations in the orders submitted in the Communication. Alleged violation of article 16 of the ACRWC on cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment 30. The Complainants have argued that mandatory pregnancy testing and the expulsion of pregnant and married girls inflict physical and mental suffering upon them and amount to cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment under article 16 of the Charter. They also allege that the illegal detention of pregnant girls, who in some cases are survivors of sexual violence, to extract information about who impregnated them, constitutes a further violation of article 16. The Respondent State has argued that there is no evidence of such treatment and that its measures comply with article 16 of the Charter. Furthermore, the Respondent State has argued that it cannot be held responsible for the conduct of private actors where the State cannot be shown to have instigated this conduct. 31. The issues for determination by the Committee regarding whether the practices of mandatory pregnancy testing and expulsion and the illegal detention of pregnant girls who are sometimes also survivors of sexual violence amount to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. It is also necessary to determine whether the State can be held responsible for the conduct of private actors in this context. 32. At the outset, it must be stated that the Committee has previously ruled that the State is responsible for acts that violate article 16 which are perpetrated by private actors where the State has not acted to prevent or investigate such acts, so long as it can be shown that representatives of the State knew or had reasonable grounds to believe JN 14