rights violations comparable in gravity to murder, torture, arson and destruction of property. The decision may be quoted and used to explore justice for conflict-time mass rapes despite the fact that there is no explicit prohibition of rape or sexual violence in the African Charter. v) Extent of States’ Due Diligence Responsibility Taking cues from the other regional mechanisms, the African Commission ruled strongly on the standards of States’ due diligence responsibility for violations by private actors in Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum v. Zimbabwe.97 It is well documented that unless situated in a conflict or post conflict country, most violations of women’s rights are by private actors or public officials acting in a private capacity. For many years after adoption of the standards set in the declaration of universal human rights, women have been deprived the protection of international law because of the presumption that international human rights treaties and conventions regulate only State conduct. While human rights treaties do set human rights standards for States to respect and promote, States also have an obligation to protect their citizens from violation of these rights by others. When States fail in their performance of this obligation, they incur a direct responsibility. The African Commission in Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum v Zimbabwe ruled that “… an act by a private individual and therefore not directly imputable to a State can generate responsibility of the State, not because of the act itself, but because of the lack of due diligence 98 to prevent the violation or for not taking the necessary steps to provide the victims with reparation”. The Commission cited the judgment of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the case of Velásquez Rodríguez v Honduras99 which sets the standard for determining State responsibility for acts by private individuals. The Inter-American Court reaffirmed that States are “obliged to investigate every situation involving a violation of the rights protected by [international law]” and to “take reasonable steps to prevent human rights violations and to use the means at its disposal to carry out a serious investigation of violations committed within its jurisdiction, to identify those responsible, to impose the appropriate punishment and to ensure the victim adequate compensation”. 100 The Commission applied this authoritative interpretation of State duty, by extension, to Article 1101 of the African Charter of Human and Peoples’ Rights and transformed what is otherwise a private conduct to a constructive act of State, “because of the lack of due diligence to prevent the violation or respond to it as required by the [African Charter]”.102 The significance of the due diligence responsibility of the State to protect women and prevent violations cannot be understated. While the most pervasive form of violence against women by private actors is domestic violence, it is also a well-documented fact that most offenders in the case of rape are persons known to the victim, which often are private or non-State actors. Like in domestic violence, women often find it difficult to get the local police and State institutions to take action against the offender in cases of sexual violence. 97 Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum v Zimbabwe (Commu. No. 245/02) available at: http://caselaw.ihrda.org/doc/245.02/view/. 98 In human rights jurisprudence this standard was first articulated by a regional court, the Inter- American Court of Human Rights, in looking at the obligations of the State of Honduras under the American Convention on Human Rights. See, Velásquez-Rodríguez, ser. C., No.4, 9 Human Rights Law Journal 212 (1988). 99 Velásquez Rodriguez v. Honduras, Inter-Am Court of Human Rights, Judgment of 29 July 1989. 100 Ibid., ¶ 174. 101 “…recognize the rights, duties and freedoms enshrined in the Charter and … undertake to adopt legislative and other measures to give effect to them”. 102 Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum v Zimbabwe (Commu. No. 245/02) available at: http://caselaw.ihrda.org/doc/245.02/view/, ¶ 144. REDRESS | REGIONAL MECHANISMS 29