A/HRC/23/49 internal law of the parties and they have the discretion to decide what kind of negligent behaviour is actionable.24 39. The Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa (the Maputo Protocol) entered into force in 2005. It draws heavily on international law instruments, particularly the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women and the Beijing Declaration. The Protocol defines violence against women and creates a number of positive State obligations in the area of violence against women. Article 2 addresses the elimination of all forms of discrimination through appropriate legislative, institutional and regulatory measures. The due diligence standard is incorporated in several provisions, including in article 4, para. 2 (a), which calls on States to enact and enforce laws to prohibit all forms of violence against women, including unwanted or forced sex, whether the violence takes place in private or public. Article 4, para. 2 (b), broadly directs States to adopt any other measures necessary to ensure the prevention, punishment and eradication of all forms of violence against women. 40. Article 4, paragraph 2 (c) and (d), of the Protocol places a positive obligation on States to study the causes of violence and promote awareness and other measures to eliminate these causes, while paragraph 2 (i) calls on States to fund all appropriate measures. Paragraph 2 (e) and (f) refer to punishment and effective reparations. Article 25 sets out the positive obligation of States to provide all appropriate remedies for women whose rights have been violated. Article 26 addresses implementation issues and calls on States to undertake all necessary measures, and notes in particular the necessity of funding and providing resources for effective implementation. The primary enforcement mechanism for the Protocol is through the reporting process to the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights. C. Analysis of information received 41. In continuity with the analysis already undertaken by the mandate over the past 19 years, the current Special Rapporteur attempted, through an evidence-based approach to research and theoretical and practical knowledge, to analyse the extent to which States are fulfilling their responsibility to act with due diligence to eliminate violence against women. The research was conducted through a call for information to Member States and civil society organizations, and consultations in a few regions. The goal was to collect country experiences, from the perspective of both State and non-State actors, on the interpretation, application and effectiveness of the measures being taken by States in their efforts to eliminate violence against women. 42. Unfortunately, providing substantive findings and recommendations on interpretation, application and effectiveness of measures has been limited by a number of factors: there was a low response rate of both State and non-State sectors; the low response rate was further impacted by the quality of responses received; the mandate faced challenges due to the lack of resources for substantive and specialized empirical research and analysis; and the information gathered at regional consultations was impacted by resource and knowledge constraints. Furthermore, another barrier is the fact that there is no legally binding instrument under international law, specifically on violence against women, to effectively monitor State responsibility to act with due diligence in their efforts to respond to, prevent and eliminate all forms of violence against women. 24 12 Ad Hoc Committee on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence (CAHVIO), Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence: Draft Explanatory Memorandum, Strasbourg, 28 January 2011.