406. The Respondent State prays the Court to reject this request. *** 407. The Court recalls that guarantees of non-repetition are aimed at ensuring that violations do not reoccur. As a form of reparations, they serve to prevent future violations, to cease on-going violations and to assure victims of past violations of the harm they suffered and of action to prevent the repetition thereof.116 408. The overall aim of guarantees of non-repetition is to “break the structural causes of societal violence, which are often conducive to an environment in which [human rights violations] take place and are not publicly condemned or adequately punished.117 409. The Court reiterates its finding that the Respondent State was not diligent in investigating, prosecuting and sentencing perpetrators of human rights violations of PWA. Consequently, the Court notes that it has already ordered the Respondent State to finalize and implement the national strategy that would promote and protect the rights of PWA. This strategy would include action points on sensitization of the public and training of law enforcement officers in order to curb the attacks on PWA on account of superstitions and harmful beliefs. 410. In addition, the Court deems it appropriate to also order especially that the Respondent State to take necessary steps to raise awareness on the myths regarding albinism, within two years of notification of this judgment, through far-reaching campaigns sustained continuously for at least two years. The campaigns should be in all national languages, involve persons with albinism and target communities in rural areas in particular. African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights v. Kenya, ACtHPR, Application No. 006/2012, Judgment on of 23 June 2022 (Reparations), supra, § 148. Rashidi v. Tanzania (merits and reparations), supra, § 146. 117 African Commission on Human and peoples’ Rights v. Kenya (reparations), ibid. 116 92