A/HRC/4/WG.3/6 page 7 lack of adequate norms addressing a given phenomenon, in general - a normative gap proper - and/or absence of an instrument, enabling the application of existing standards to a given category/ies of subjects and/or specific circumstances. Such a normative gap is in the application. 8. In identifying normative gaps, the experts noted that a gap exists not only when there is a complete absence of norms addressing the problem. A gap can also be identified when a standard does not provide sufficient specificity so as to impose clear obligations on the duty-bearers, thereby rendering effective protection of rights illusory. 9. The distinction between “normative gap proper” and “application gap” is helpful in the consideration of recommended measures to be taken to fill a gap. While in the first case, setting or developing a standard to address a specific phenomenon may be the best solution; in the second, the extension of the application of an existing standard may be sufficient. 10. Normative gaps can further be divided into substantive and procedural (supervisory) gaps, depending on whether the gap in question relates to the content of a right or the procedure of its protection. A procedural gap exists when a right has been included in an instrument, but no mechanism exists to monitor and enforce compliance thereto, or the mechanism is insufficient to ensure compliance or provide remedy to victims. 11. The experts understand their mandate as focusing on studying substantive normative gaps, while procedural (supervisory) gaps are being addressed in a parallel study by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD). 12. The diagnosis of gaps is based on analysis of international human rights law and current facts. Bearing in mind the impact of implementation gaps on the functional assessment of the existing legal framework, the experts recognized certain findings concerning implementation gaps as an integral part of their analysis and assessments. 3. Measures to address substantive normative gaps 13. Practical steps that may be considered to fill the gaps are the following: (a) new standard setting - in the form of a separate convention and/or optional protocol/s to the existing ones; and (b) standard development through extended application of the existing standards as to the substance or circle of addressees, including by the following means: (i) authentic interpretation of the existing treaty norms by States parties, (ii) general comments by treaty bodies, adopted by human rights treaty bodies individually or jointly; (iii) incorporation of the extended interpretation into the reporting guidelines adopted by human rights treaty bodies; and (iv) incorporation of the extended interpretation into the rules of procedure adopted by human rights treaty bodies. 14. The experts recognize the need to correlate the recommended measures with the nature of the normative gaps that have been identified. While analyzing specific gaps, they have been guided by the extent to which the proposed measure/s can improve the situation of victims of