A/HRC/23/49 43. Despite the existence of interpretative guidelines and monitoring on violence against women, through the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women and universal periodic review processes, the limitations of a large and varied monitoring mandate, coupled with time constraints when examining State party reports, results in the insufficient interrogation of the information relating to violence against women, its causes and consequences, and the insufficient assessment of effective compliance with existing standards. Thus these challenges, among others, have an impact on assessing the efficacy of measures developed for addressing all forms of violence against women. The current reality, globally, is one where most Member States have acknowledged that violence against women is the most prevalent human rights violation facing countries, with spousal/partner violence as the most common manifestation of such violence. However, this acknowledgement has not led to the adoption of necessary solutions that are coherent and sustainable, and which would lead to elimination of all forms of violence against all women. In fact, the view from civil society is that the prevalence rates are increasing and also manifesting in new forms in many parts of the world. Also, that impunity for both perpetrators and State officials who fail to protect and prevent violence against women continues to be the norm. 44. Forty-three responses (22 per cent) were received from Member States25 and 17 responses were received from civil society organizations. Approximately half the State responses directly addressed the issues raised in the call for information. All State responses reflect information on existing national laws, policies and plans; some responses refer to future initiatives at the national level; and some responses refer to State efforts outside of the national context. Less than 10 per cent of States articulate their responsibility to act with due diligence as emanating from legally binding international human rights law, despite the widespread ratification of treaties such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. 45. The Special Rapporteur also convened and/or participated in five regional consultations.26 The consultations gathered between 10 and 20 experts from within the region, and representatives of United Nations agencies were also invited to attend selected sessions. Participants were provided with a short submission prior to the meeting highlighting national approaches and challenges identified through a desk research process. 25 26 The Special Rapporteur thanks the following Member States for responding to her call for information: Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bulgaria, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Cuba, Czech Republic, Estonia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Latvia, Lebanon, Lithuania, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Montenegro, Morocco, New Zealand, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Qatar, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Singapore, Slovenia, Spain, Suriname, Switzerland, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkey, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and Venezuela (Bolivian Republic of). The initial mapping exercise and research on State responsibility to act with due diligence was funded by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). Further voluntary research was carried out by Jonathan Strug (University of Cape Town) and students in the International Human Rights Law Clinic at the University of Virginia, under the supervision of Deena Hurvitz. The Middle East and North Africa consultation was held in Tunisia, on 20 and 21 June 2012 (funded by the Government of the United Kingdom). The Central and South-Eastern Europe consultation was held in Slovakia on 9 and 10 December 2012 (funded by UN-Women). The Pacific Islands consultation was held in Fiji on 27 and 28 January 2013 (funded by UN-Women). The sub-Saharan Africa consultations, attended by the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, were hosted by different organizations and were held in South Africa on 8 and 9 December 2011 and in Uganda on 2 and 3 April 2012. The South Africa meeting was organized and funded by the African Network of Constitutional Lawyers, which is hosted by the Democratic Governance and Rights Unit, University of Cape Town. The Uganda meeting was hosted by the Uganda Association of Women Lawyers (FIDA Uganda) and the Centre for Applied Legal Studies, University of Witwatersrand. 13