A/HRC/44/46/Add.2 perpetuated in the lives of these persons and their children who suffer endless trauma and restrictions on their enjoyment of social, economic and cultural rights. 68. The Special Rapporteur had four meetings with representatives of persons who had been subjected to forced segregation and their descendants. One was at the State Institute of Sanitary Dermatology in Rio de Janeiro, known as the former colony of Curupaiti and currently one of the reference centres for Hansen’s disease, where multidrug therapy was first tested in Brazil. Another was at the Marcello Candia specialized reference unit, and the other two were at civil society organization meetings, one in Rio de Janeiro and one in Belém. This provided for very different spaces, the differences seeming to relate to the proximity or lack thereof to the administrative centres. Particularly in former Hansen’s disease colonies on the periphery of these centres, an alarming level of institutional neglect was reported, with high levels of poverty, limited or no access to health care, assistive devices or materials, or to basic services and resources, but also cases of relapses and ongoing transmission. The threat of eviction was reported in some regions which, according to the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in its general comment No. 4 (1991) on the right to adequate housing, is a prima facie violation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. 69. Nevertheless, good and best practices in the fields of research, care, assistance, land regulation and preservation of history were observed. The Special Rapporteur highlights the quality of international research and rehabilitation provided at the Lauro de Souza Lima Institute in São Paulo; the regulation of land and property, resulting in the transfer of the usufruct and ownership of property to persons affected by Hansen’s disease and their family members in the States of Acre, Rio de Janeiro and Minas Gerais; the health-care programme of persons affected by Hansen’s disease, but also of their family members, provided at Santa Izabel (Minas Gerais); and interventions on history preservation also at Santa Izabel. Many such practices are the result of participatory administration that included MORHAN as a partner. In some of the former colonies, Brazil is undoubtedly leading the implementation of guideline No. 5.4 of the principles and guidelines for the elimination of discrimination against persons affected by leprosy and their family members. Such efforts should be extended to all former colonies in the country, benefiting from the already good and best practices in place. B. Separated children of persons affected by Hansen’s disease 70. It is reported that approximately 16,000 children were separated from their parents, who were affected by Hansen’s disease, as a result of the segregation policy; they were sent to institutions known as preventoriums between the 1920s and the 1980s. There are also reports of illegal adoptions and even executions. Accurate data about those children is not yet available and the whereabouts of many of them remains unknown. In addition, these people do not have access to their medical files and records for the period during which they were at the preventoriums. These children grew up without any contact with their biological parents and many of them experienced imprisonment, inhumane treatment and torture in the preventoriums, such as forced labour, sexual abuse and other forms of physical and psychological violence. As a result of these violations, many of these people do not have access today to an adequate standard of living and economic autonomy, and many suffer from psychosocial disorders and disabilities that impair their rehabilitation and inclusion in society. 71. Public interest litigation cases have been filed in the States of São Paulo, Maranhão and Amazonas demanding reparation measures, but they are still pending. The delay in some cases has been excessive and unjustifiable. They are: collective action filed at the State of São Paulo Federal Court in 2017, MORHAN vs. Federal Government,32 collective action filed at the State of Maranhão Federal Court in 2011, Federal Public Defenders’ Office vs. Federal Government, 33 and collective action filed at the State of Amazonas 32 33 See www.justificando.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Petic%CC%A7a%CC%83o-Inicial-ACPMORHAN-1.pdf. See www.dpu.def.br/images/stories/acao-civil-coletiva/ACP_DPU-MA_filhos_separados_ hanseniase_politicas_compensatorias.pdf. 15