20. Article 12 of International covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural rights provides: ‘’The State Parties to the present covenant recognise the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health’’ 21. The duty of due diligence under International Law evolved from the principles of diplomatic protection whereby a state incurs international responsibility for the commission of an international wrongful act against a non-national persons. It has been applied in the context of human rights violations since landmark case of VELASQUEZ RODRIQUEZ VS. HONDURAS (1989). In this case the Inter American court of Human Rights held that a state must take action to prevent human rights violations, and to investigate, prosecute and punish them when they occur. The Court determined that: “The state’s failure or omission to take preventive or protective action itself represents a violation of basic rights on the State’s part. This is because the state controls the means to verify acts occurring within its territory.” 22. States may also be responsible for private acts if they fail, with due diligence, to prevent violation of rights or investigate and punish acts of violence, and for providing adequate compensation. The Council of Europe Recommendation (2002) of the Committee of Minister to member states recognize that states have an obligation to exercise due diligence to prevent, investigate and punish acts of violence, whether those acts are perpetrated by the state or private persons and provide protection to victims. 23. The Applicants contend that the Respondents have failed to discharge its positive obligation diligently by not taking prompt preventive operational measures to protect individuals whose lives were at risk. Article 23 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights recognises that the family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and state. Protection of the family and it members is also guaranteed, directly or indirectly, by other provisions of the Covenant. Thus Article 17 establishes a prohibition on arbitrary or unlawful interference with the family 24. Victims of arbitrary killing are entitled to adequate compensation from the state where the violation was committed. Granting compensation is separate from the additional obligation on states to conduct prompt, transparent and effective 6