A/HRC/41/47 V. Progress and bottlenecks in eliminating discrimination A. Public responses to leprosy-related discrimination 73. With a view to supporting the work undertaken by Governments and civil society organizations to eliminate discrimination on the grounds of leprosy, the Special Rapporteur attempted to map institutional and public responses to leprosy and related violations with respect to women and children by means of a consultation with States and leprosy organizations. 74. Thirteen States responded to the call by the Special Rapporteur, providing detailed information on measures in place to tackle leprosy and discrimination on those grounds. Contributions were received from Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Burundi, Côte d’Ivoire, Ecuador, Georgia, Guatemala, Japan, Montenegro, Paraguay, Peru, the Philippines and Tunisia. The majority of the responses came from non-priority countries, with the exception of Brazil, Côte d’Ivoire and the Philippines, which still have a high burden of leprosy. Such a gap calls for sturdier cooperation from priority countries. 37 75. Sixteen civil society organizations provided valuable inputs from high-burden countries (Bangladesh, Brazil, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, India, Nepal and Nigeria) and low-burden countries (Cambodia, China, Colombia, Japan, Malaysia, Pakistan and Papua New Guinea). 76. Four national human rights institutions, from Azerbaijan, India, Nigeria and Uganda, also responded to the appeal of the Special Rapporteur. 77. Approximately half of the responses obtained from Governments and civil society organizations confirmed that there are existing monitoring systems for leprosy in place. The following countries reported statistical data on women and children affected by leprosy: Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Burundi, Cambodia, Côte d’Ivoire, Colombia, Ecuador, Ethiopia, India, Japan, Nigeria, Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru and the Philippines. The data provided confirm overall male-over-female preponderance in the detection of leprosy. 78. Contributions received from Governments, national human rights institutions and civil society organizations confirmed ongoing discrimination against women and children affected by leprosy and referred to practices that align with the results of the individual consultation. The same contributions pointed to the absence of institutional segregation. However, segregation was referred to as a past policy that nevertheless continues to have an impact on the lives of persons affected by leprosy and their family members, including the children and grandchildren of persons affected by leprosy who were forcibly segregated into leprosy colonies. Those violations include generalized informal segregation and lack of property rights in the case of former leprosy colonies. 1. Challenges in enforcing formal equality 79. A significant portion of the responses reported the lack of a national plan for the implementation of the principles and guidelines. Nevertheless, responses from countries such as Bangladesh, Brazil, Bolivia, Burundi, Colombia, Ecuador, India, Peru, Paraguay and the Philippines highlighted interventions in the field of care, rehabilitation, assessment of discrimination, awareness-raising and outreach activities that are in line with the WHO Global Leprosy Strategy (2016–2020). Moreover, non-endemic countries, such as Japan, referred to efforts in raising awareness on leprosy as a human rights issue. Lastly, civil society organizations from India and Japan mentioned strategic litigation activities as a means to achieve legal harmonization in the former country and reparation measures for 37 14 WHO priority countries for leprosy are: Angola, Bangladesh, Brazil, Comoros, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, Micronesia (Federated States of), India, Indonesia, Kiribati, Madagascar, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Nigeria, Philippines, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, Sudan and United Republic of Tanzania.