An Intersectional Analysis of Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in the Regional Conflict in the Great Lakes Region of Africa since 1994: The 1994 Genocide in Rwanda (1/2)

Temps de lecture : 10 minutes

An Intersectional Analysis of Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in the Regional Conflict in the Great Lakes Region of Africa since 1994: the 1994 Genocide in Rwanda (1/2)

Source : www.pri.org

27.05.2021 

Bridget Nievinski

Introduction

The Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) explains that “conflicts exacerbate existing gender inequalities, placing women at a heightened risk of various forms of gender-based violence by both State and non-State actors[1]UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), “General recommendation No. 30 on women in conflict prevention, conflict and post-conflict situations”, 1 November … Continue reading”. This convention further points out that “discrimination against women is also compounded by intersecting forms of discrimination[2]Ibid.”. Considering these facts, this collection of articles unveils an intersectional analysis of sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV)[3]“Sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) refers to any act that is perpetrated against a person’s will and is based on gender norms and unequal power relationships”. “Sexual and Gender … Continue reading in the ongoing regional conflict in the Great Lakes region of Africa since 1994. The series starts by applying intersectionality as a research paradigm to examine the motivations behind the violence against women during the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, specifically the intersecting categories of ethnicity and political affiliation. These categories do not play an equal role in the targeting of violence against women during conflict, however, there is a dynamic interaction between these classifications at the individual and also at the institutional level[4]Hancock, Ange-Marie, “When Multiplication Doesn’t Equal Quick Addition: Examining Intersectionality as a Research Paradigm,” 2007, Perspectives on Politics, vol. 5, no. 1, page 64..  

This article applies this interdisciplinary framework to a specific regional context to avoid an oversimplified examination of SGBV against women in the Great Lakes, while considering the historical genealogy of ethnic relations, conflict and the role of women in Rwanda. The 1994 genocide in Rwanda functions as our temporal and spatial starting point because this event created an estimated two million refugees[5]United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), “Chapter 10: The Rwandan Genocide and Its Aftermath”, 2000, The State of The World’s Refugees 2000: Fifty Years of Humanitarian Action, … Continue reading, among them the genocidaires or those who committed genocide in 1994 in Rwanda. They fled into neighboring countries, primarily to the east regions of the Democratic Republic of Congo where violence and conflict has persisted for over two decades. Thus, this first article situates the Rwandan genocide as the genesis of SGBV in the region on such a vast and vehement scale.

Intersectionality as a Research Paradigm

To understand intersectionality as a research paradigm, it is essential to define it. According to Patricia Hill Collins, an American academic and sociology professor, “intersectionality views categories of race, class, gender, sexuality, nation, ability, ethnicity, and age – among others – as interrelated and mutually shaping one another[6]Collins, Patricia Hill, and Sirma Bilge, Intersectionality, 2nd edition, 2020, page 1.”. Intersectionality is a way to explain how overlapping identities multiply the oppressions that an individual or group of individuals may experience, in other words, these interactions form a “matrix of domination[7]Ibid.”.  Furthermore, such oppressions are integral when States and civil society determine political access, equality, and the potential for any form of justice[8]Hancock, Ange-Marie, “When Multiplication Doesn’t Equal Quick Addition: Examining Intersectionality as a Research Paradigm,” 2007, Perspectives on Politics, vol. 5, no. 1, [American Political … Continue reading. This point is useful for our examination since the genocide was organized by the State, orchestrated by the people, and perpetrated along identity lines. While intersectionality finds its origins during the civil rights movements in the United States of America to discuss the oppression of African American women[9]“Kimberlé Crenshaw on Intersectionality, More than Two Decades Later”, 8 June 2017, Columbia Law School, , … Continue reading, this concept is used in this article as an analytical tool in a localized context as a way to examine gender-based violence. This series looks beyond gender and emphasizes the role ethnic identity and political affiliation played in victimization. These interactions and experiences “occur within a context of connected systems and structures of power[10]Hankivsky, Olena, “Intersectionality 101”, 2014, Institute for Intersectionality Research and Policy, Simon Fraser University, vol. 64, page 2. ” which we will consider in the following section on the genocide in Rwanda.

Contextualizing the Rwandan Genocide

To contextualize this analysis, a brief overview of the events leading up to and creating a fertile ground for a genocide in Rwanda is fundamental. Germany was the first colonial power of Rwanda which was granted control of the country at the Berlin Conference of 1884 – 1885. However, in 1916 this control shifted to the Belgians at the Versailles Conference via a League of Nations mandate[11]Segal, Aaron, “Rwanda/ The Underlying Causes: A behind-the-Headlines Report on Bahutu-Batutsi Warfare”, 1964, Africa Report, vol. 9, issue 4, page 2, url: … Continue reading. During the colonial period, a halfway house of direct and indirect Belgian rule was established. This method of rule created a hierarchy between the Tutsi and Hutu (and 1% Twa) on a majority/minority axis[12]Mamdani, Mahmood, When Victims Become Killers: Colonialism, Nativism, and the Genocide in Rwanda, Princeton University Press, 2001, page 100.. In this hierarchy, the Tutsi minority ruled over the Hutu majority and created a deadly polarization. The Bahutu Manifesto, published in 1957, calling for the liberation of the Hutu led to a ‘Social revolution’ in 1959, accompanied by independence from Belgium in 1962, that inversed the social and political hierarchy and strengthened the divide amongst the two racial groups[13]Ibid., page 116..

In the early 1990s before the genocide, there was an attempt to reconcile between opposing political parties via the Arusha Accords signed in 1993. These unsuccessful peace negotiations failed to end the civil war in Rwanda. The failure led to massacres of both Tutsi and Hutu then ultimately a genocide killing approximately 800,000 Tutsi in only three months in 1994. While the genocide in Rwanda targeted an ethnic group after decades of hatred and mistrust crystallized amongst the Hutu, moderate Hutu were also targeted for their resistance and/or thei
r protection of Tutsi[14]Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., “Sexual Violence During the Rwandan Genocide and Its Aftermath”, Human Rights Watch … Continue reading. Fearing prosecution, many of the genocidaires fled, among other Hutu, to the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. The relevance of this exodus will become evident in the second article of this series.

As is the case for most genocides, the goal was to destroy the Tutsi population via killings and SGBV[15]Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., “Sexual Violence During the Rwandan Genocide and Its Aftermath”, 1996, Human Rights Watch … Continue reading. The Interahamwe, a Hutu militia, and other local militarized groups committed unconscionable crimes. Among these crimes were individual and collective acts of sexual violence: rape, gang rape, forced marriages, sexual slavery, and sexual mutilation[16]Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., page 20, op. cit.. Even though the genocide was carried out on a personal and communal level, there was notable institutional influence that mobilized the Hutu population not only to kill but also to violate and assault Tutsi women. Men raped on account of their own free will, but they were also encouraged by the leaders of local militias, the army and government officials[17]Ibid., pages 20-21. Furthermore, extremist propaganda “explicitly identified the sexuality of Tutsi women as a means through which the Tutsi community sought to infiltrate and control the Hutu community[18]Ibid., page 2”. The newspaper Kangura which published the Hutu Ten Commandments delineating extensive prohibitions between Hutu and Tutsi[19]Mamdani, Mahmood, op. cit. specifically mentioned the dangers of Tutsi women[20]Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., page 11, op. cit..

According to a report by Human Rights Watch (HRW), before the genocide and during the civil war, women and children were generally spared. This approach changed during the genocide and “all Tutsi were targeted, regardless of sex or age[21]Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., page 21, op. cit.”. Jennie Burnet,  a socio-cultural anthropologist, describes this change as “an abrupt break from social norms, especially in terms of sexual assault[22]Burnet, Jennie E, “Rape as a Weapon of Genocide: Gender, Patriarchy, and Sexual Violence in the Rwandan Genocide”, 2015, Anthropology Faculty Publications, vol. 13, page 1.”. What is the reason for this change? HRW explains that rape is not simply a consequence of war, but rather “a weapon to terrorize and degrade a particular community and to achieve a specific political end[23]Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., page 2, op. cit.,” which was to ethnically cleanse Rwanda of the Tutsi population. To this end, the genocidaires targeted Tutsi women for the Hutu to achieve their goal. While victims of sexual abuse during conflict can be chosen irrespective of their ethnicity or political affiliation[24]Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., page 2, op. cit., this article demonstrates how their identities played a role in their victimization.

Intersection of identities and their role in victimization of Rwandan women

Rape as a war crime and as an act of genocide are both crimes against humanity and differentiating between the two emerges from analyzing the intersection of ethnicity and gender. In fact, “the Statute of the Tribunal for Rwanda defines crimes against humanity as those crimes, including rape, that are ‘committed as a part of a widespread or systematic attack against any civilian population on national, political, ethnic, racial or religious grounds’[25]Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., page 18, op. cit.”. Genocide is distinguished from other crimes “by the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group” as defined by Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide[26]UN General Assembly, “Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide”, 9 December 1948, A/RES/260, url: https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crimeofgenocide.aspx.. In part (d) and (e) of this Article, the General Assembly indirectly yet clearly refers to sexual violence by considering “measures intended to prevent births within the group” or “forcibly transferring children of the group to another” as acts of genocide. This notion of forcible transferring children is relevant because, in Rwanda, there is a patriarchal lineage which means that the father’s ethnicity is passed to the child, and not the mother’s ethnicity. Considering these precisions, it becomes clear that SGBV against Tutsi is an act of genocide not only because of the effect it has physically and mentally on the victim[27]See part (b) of Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide prohibiting bodily or mental harm to members of the group. but because of how this violence interrupts the ability of Tutsi women to bring Tutsi children into the world. Considering the emphasis placed on motherhood in Rwandan society, such violence brings about feelings of shame and depression but also ostracizes these women from their community.

This article differentiates rape during the genocide as ‘strategic rape’ and ‘opportunist rape’, the former being a tactic to gain advantage[28]Benshoof, Janet, “The Other Red Line: The Use of Rape as an Unlawful Tactic of Warfare”, May 2014, Global Policy, vol. 5, no. 2, page 147.. In the case of Rwanda, the purpose was to destroy the Tutsi ethnic group and also “to humiliate, dominate, instill fear in, disperse and/or forcibly relocate civilian members of…[an] ethnic group[29]United Nations Security Council Resolution 1820, “Preamble. New York”, 2008, NY: UN, url :  https://www.peacewomen.org/SCR-1820.”. The HRW report on SGBV during the Rwandan genocide is filled with detailed interviews by women, both Tutsi and Hutu, who experienced sexual violence during the 100 days of genocide in 1994. In fact, many testimonies verified the role that ethnicity played in their victimization: they affirmed that their rapists mentioned their ethnicity during or after the crime[30]Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., page 2, op. cit..

A case tried by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) found that “sexual violence was an integral part of the process of destruction… [of Tutsi women and] of the Tutsi group as a whole[31]International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (1998) Judgment, Prosecutor vs Akayesu, Case No. ICTR-96-4-T, 2 September, … Continue reading”. The tribunal and the charges against Jean-Paul Akayesu, a Rwandan citizen and bourgmestre, the Rwandan equivalent of
mayor, led to the “first successful prosecution of rape as a weapon of genocide under international law[32]Burnet, Jennie E, page 15, op. cit.”. Based on this outcome by the ICTR and the testimonies gathered by HRW[33]Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., op. cit., we can conclude that sexual violence was indeed a way to dehumanize and destroy the Tutsi. Those who survived the genocide have many more battles to overcome such as living with trauma and health complications from the violence they experienced: namely, living with or dying from HIV, unsafe abortions, raising a child of rape, also referred to as “children of hate,” which leads to intergenerational trauma that is still felt today[34]Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., page 3, op. cit.. & Benshoof, Janet, page 153, op. cit..

While it is credible that Tutsi women were the majority of victims of SGBV during the genocide, it is overly simplistic to say that they were only targeted by Hutu perpetrators[35]Burnet, Jennie E, “Rape as a Weapon of Genocide: Gender, Patriarchy, and Sexual Violence in the Rwandan Genocide”, Anthropology Faculty Publications, vol. 13, 2015, page 1.. Accordingly, it is important to mention that moderate Hutu women (and men) were killed as a result of their opposition to the genocide. Regarding rape against Hutu women, the reasoning differed, and the numbers were considerably less[36]Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., “Sexual Violence During the Rwandan Genocide and Its Aftermath”, Human Rights Watch … Continue reading. If a Hutu woman was married to a Tutsi, protected one or even close to one she could find herself a victim[37]Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., “Sexual Violence During the Rwandan Genocide and Its Aftermath”, Human Rights Watch … Continue reading. However, because of the reasoning, sexual violence against Hutu women did not contribute to the genocidal regimes political goal and thus is not considered an act of genocide. Nonetheless, they are still crimes against humanity and can be considered instead as opportunistic war crimes.

Rape as a war crime, an act of genocide, a strategic rape or an opportunistic rape is prohibited by the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the additional protocols of 1977. Thus, both Tutsi and Hutu women have the right to bring their cases to the ICTR or to the local gaçaça courts, the restorative justice system based on Rwandan tradition. However, many women fear their attackers will seek revenge, that they will be ostracized from their community, or remain silent if their story does not fit the “Hutu-perpetrator/Tutsi-victim dyad[38]Burnet, Jennie E, page 20, op. cit.”. Due to the restriction on freedom of speech in Rwanda after the genocide imposed by the Rwandan Patriotic Front government, testimonies that strayed from the dominant narrative were oppressed. In studies of intersectionality, scholars mention the “in-group essentialism” in which some members of a group pressure sub-groups to suppress their experience “to present a united front[39]Hancock, Ange-Marie, “When Multiplication Doesn’t Equal Quick Addition: Examining Intersectionality as a Research Paradigm,” 2007, Perspectives on Politics, vol. 5, no. 1, page 65.”. We can see this dynamic in Rwanda with Tutsi women suppressing the experience of Hutu women. This is damaging not only to Hutu women, but to a society that requires recognition of the crimes committed against them, even if these crimes do not fit the promoted narrative.

Conclusion

Conflict-related SGBV became the norm during the 1994 genocide in Rwanda and resulted in a myriad of physical and psychological consequences for both Tutsi and Hutu women[40]United Nations High Commissioner for “General Recommendation No. 30 on Women in Conflict Prevention, Conflict and Post-Conflict Situations”, UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination … Continue reading. Since sexual violence against Tutsi women was intentionally perpetrated against them due to their ethnicity and to advance political goals, it constitutes acts of genocide. Contrarily, sexual violence against Hutu women is not delineated as a tactic of genocide, instead it is more clearly understood as an opportunistic rape which can constitute war crimes. Despite these categorizations, all women in Rwanda who experienced sexual violence deserve justice. In the next article of this series, we will continue this subject by conducting an intersectional analysis on violence against women in the eastern part of the Democratic Republic of Congo.

 To quote this article : Bridget NIEVINSKI, “An Intersectional Analysis of Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in the Regional Conflict in the Great Lakes Region of Africa since 1994: The 1994 Genocide in Rwanda (1/2)”, 27.05.2021, Gender in Geopolitics Institute.

References

References
1 UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), “General recommendation No. 30 on women in conflict prevention, conflict and post-conflict situations”, 1 November 2013, CEDAW/C/GC/30, url: https://www.ohchr.org/documents/hrbodies/cedaw/gcomments/cedaw.c.cg.30.pdf
2, 7 Ibid.
3 “Sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) refers to any act that is perpetrated against a person’s will and is based on gender norms and unequal power relationships”. “Sexual and Gender Based Violence (SGBV) prevention and response”, UNHCR The UN Refugee Agency, accessed 25 February 2021, url: https://emergency.unhcr.org/entry/60283/sexual-and-gender-based-violence-sgbv-prevention-and-response
4 Hancock, Ange-Marie, “When Multiplication Doesn’t Equal Quick Addition: Examining Intersectionality as a Research Paradigm,” 2007, Perspectives on Politics, vol. 5, no. 1, page 64.
5 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), “Chapter 10: The Rwandan Genocide and Its Aftermath”, 2000, The State of The World’s Refugees 2000: Fifty Years of Humanitarian Action, url: https://www.unhcr.org/en-ie/3ebf9bb60.pdf.
6 Collins, Patricia Hill, and Sirma Bilge, Intersectionality, 2nd edition, 2020, page 1.
8 Hancock, Ange-Marie, “When Multiplication Doesn’t Equal Quick Addition: Examining Intersectionality as a Research Paradigm,” 2007, Perspectives on Politics, vol. 5, no. 1, [American Political Science Association, Cambridge University Press], page 64.
9 “Kimberlé Crenshaw on Intersectionality, More than Two Decades Later”, 8 June 2017, Columbia Law School, , url: https://www.law.columbia.edu/news/archive/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality-more-two-decades-later.
10 Hankivsky, Olena, “Intersectionality 101”, 2014, Institute for Intersectionality Research and Policy, Simon Fraser University, vol. 64, page 2.
11 Segal, Aaron, “Rwanda/ The Underlying Causes: A behind-the-Headlines Report on Bahutu-Batutsi Warfare”, 1964, Africa Report, vol. 9, issue 4, page 2, url: https://search.proquest.com/openview/eba776f34bab41f2214e08b06bbb11d8/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=1820943
12 Mamdani, Mahmood, When Victims Become Killers: Colonialism, Nativism, and the Genocide in Rwanda, Princeton University Press, 2001, page 100.
13 Ibid., page 116.
14 Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., “Sexual Violence During the Rwandan Genocide and Its Aftermath”, Human Rights Watch Women’s Rights Project, 1996, page 2, url:  https://www.hrw.org/reports/1996/Rwanda.htm.
15 Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., “Sexual Violence During the Rwandan Genocide and Its Aftermath”, 1996, Human Rights Watch Women’s Rights Project, page 2, url:  https://www.hrw.org/reports/1996/Rwanda.htm, op. cit.
16 Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., page 20, op. cit.
17 Ibid., pages 20-21
18 Ibid., page 2
19 Mamdani, Mahmood, op. cit.
20 Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., page 11, op. cit.
21 Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., page 21, op. cit.
22 Burnet, Jennie E, “Rape as a Weapon of Genocide: Gender, Patriarchy, and Sexual Violence in the Rwandan Genocide”, 2015, Anthropology Faculty Publications, vol. 13, page 1.
23, 24 Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., page 2, op. cit.
25 Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., page 18, op. cit.
26 UN General Assembly, “Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide”, 9 December 1948, A/RES/260, url: https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crimeofgenocide.aspx.
27 See part (b) of Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide prohibiting bodily or mental harm to members of the group.
28 Benshoof, Janet, “The Other Red Line: The Use of Rape as an Unlawful Tactic of Warfare”, May 2014, Global Policy, vol. 5, no. 2, page 147.
29 United Nations Security Council Resolution 1820, “Preamble. New York”, 2008, NY: UN, url :  https://www.peacewomen.org/SCR-1820.
30 Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., page 2, op. cit.
31 International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (1998) Judgment, Prosecutor vs Akayesu, Case No. ICTR-96-4-T, 2 September, url: https://unictr.irmct.org/sites/unictr.org/files/case-documents/ictr-96-4/trial-judgements/en/980902.pdf.
32 Burnet, Jennie E, page 15, op. cit.
33 Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., op. cit.
34 Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., page 3, op. cit.. & Benshoof, Janet, page 153, op. cit.
35 Burnet, Jennie E, “Rape as a Weapon of Genocide: Gender, Patriarchy, and Sexual Violence in the Rwandan Genocide”, Anthropology Faculty Publications, vol. 13, 2015, page 1.
36 Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., “Sexual Violence During the Rwandan Genocide and Its Aftermath”, Human Rights Watch Women’s Rights Project, 1996, page 21, url:  https://www.hrw.org/reports/1996/Rwanda.htm.
37 Nowrojee, Binaifer, Fleischman, J., Des Forges, A., Longman, T., Rlph, R., Wakabi, K., & Levin, S., “Sexual Violence During the Rwandan Genocide and Its Aftermath”, Human Rights Watch Women’s Rights Project, 1996, page 11, url:  https://www.hrw.org/reports/1996/Rwanda.htm.
38 Burnet, Jennie E, page 20, op. cit.
39 Hancock, Ange-Marie, “When Multiplication Doesn’t Equal Quick Addition: Examining Intersectionality as a Research Paradigm,” 2007, Perspectives on Politics, vol. 5, no. 1, page 65.
40 United Nations High Commissioner for “General Recommendation No. 30 on Women in Conflict Prevention, Conflict and Post-Conflict Situations”, UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), 1 Nov. 2013, url: https://www.ohchr.org/documents/hrbodies/cedaw/gcomments/cedaw.c.cg.30.pdf