the evidence provided, it is clear that the practice of illegally detaining pregnant girls
is unjustifiable in any context.119 It is thus an unlawful and arbitrary interference with
the right to privacy.
97. It is furthermore concerning that consensual sexual activities between adolescents
are criminalised in the Respondent State, when this is out of alignment with accepted
standards for respecting the right to privacy of the child.120 Article 10 of the ACRWC
has been violated in all respects.
Alleged violation of article 1 of the ACRWC on the obligation of States Parties
98. The Complainants in the present Communication allege that the Respondent State
has not taken comprehensive legislative measures to prevent the violation of the rights
of pregnant and married schoolgirls despite the various notice it has been given
regarding the ongoing violation. The Complainants allege that the Respondent State
has failed to investigate the matter and take action. The Respondent State argues that
it has undertaken to sever legislative measures and that the other practices are
justifiable limitations of rights.
99. The Committee therefore investigates:
-
If there is a failure to undertake legislative and other measures as provided under
article 1 of the ACRWC; and
If the justification provided by the Respondent State relieves its obligation under
article 1 of the ACRWC.
100. Article 1 of the Charter requires State Parties to the Charter to undertake legislative
and other measures towards the realization of the provisions of the Charter as well as
to discourage any practice that is inconsistent with the Charter. In further explaining
the meaning of legislative measures, the Committee previously provided that States
should adopt national laws and policies, and undertake a continuous review of the
laws and policies to assert their compliance with the Charter.121 The Committee also
provided that the element of protection of children from any form of abuse or degrading
treatment is an essential element to fulfilling article 1 of the Charter.122 Moreover, State
Parties should adopt proactive measures to discourage practices that contravene the
provisions of the Charter including addressing the underlying factors. 123 More so, the
Committee and other international human rights jurisprudences assert States Parties'
obligation in the realization of human rights entails an obligation of result, not an
obligation of diligence.124 Therefore, the Committee is of the view that the due
119 UNCRC, General Comment No. 24, para 85.
120 UNCRC, General Comment No. 20, para 39.
121
ACERWC, Communication No. 007/Com/003/2015, Minority Rights Group International and SOSEsclaves on behalf of Said Ould Salem and Yarg Ould Salem V. The Republic of Mauritania, para 47.
122 As above, para 48.
123 ACERWC, General Comment no 5 on State Party Obligations under the ACRWC and Systems
Strengthening for Child Protection, para 7.1.
124 ACERWC, Communication No. 007/Com/003/2015, Minority Rights Group International and SOSEsclaves on behalf of Said Ould Salem and Yarg Ould Salem V. The Republic of Mauritania, para 54;
JN
36