reasonable grounds to believe that acts of torture or ill-treatment are being committed by non-State actors or private actors and fail to exercise due diligence to prevent, investigate, prosecute and punish such non-State actors or private actors in accordance with the Convention, the State bears responsibility and its officials must be held perpetrators, accomplices or otherwise responsible under the Convention for consenting to or condoning such impermissible acts. Since the failure of the State to exercise due diligence to intervene and stop, sanction and provide remedies to victims of torture facilitates and enables non-State actors to commit impermissible acts under the Convention with impunity, the indifference or inaction of the State provides a form of encouragement and/or de facto permission. The Committee has applied this principle to the failure of States parties to prevent and protect victims of gender-based violence, such as rape, domestic violence, female genital mutilation and trafficking.” 109. In this case, following the case law cited above and the grounds of the General Comment, doc. 3, the request for additional evidence, substantially reinforces the Applicant’s allegations. The statement of Dr. Daniel Lavalie, the doctor responsible for examining the Applicant, confirms that the medical reports indicated a third degree vaginal prolapse secondary to sexual assault, clear evidence of the seriousness of the violence suffered. Furthermore, the statements in paragraph 63 show that all attempts to retrieve the medical and police reports were unsuccessful, which raises serious questions about the conduct of the Sierra Leonean authorities in preserving key evidence for the case. 110. The State of Sierra Leone’s failure to act is not limited to the lack of initial protection for the Applicant, but extends to its failure to conduct an effective investigation and to ensure an effective remedy. The failure to preserve medical and police documents constitutes a violation of the State’s 28 eo)