In a move away from its previously narrow interpretation of the Convention on the issue of torture by non-State actors and the question of the level and extent of State complicity, the CAT issued General Comment No. 2 in 2008 acknowledging that torture is and can be committed by non-State actors. It assigns the responsibility of such torture to State failure to “exercise due diligence to prevent, investigate, prosecute and punish such non-State officials or private actors”. It holds the State and its officials accountable “as authors, complicit or otherwise responsible under the Convention for consenting to or acquiescing in such impermissible acts”. 200 The Comment reflects the due diligence standards of other treaties such as the ICCPR and the decisions of regional human rights bodies. There are yet opportunities to hold the State accountable for failure to prevent violations by non-State actors and/or effectively investigate and prosecute their actions. 5.4 Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council ‘Special procedures’ is the general name given to the mechanisms established by the Human Rights Council to address either specific country situations or thematic issues in all parts of the world. Special procedures mandates usually call on mandate holders to examine, monitor, advise and publicly report on human rights situations in specific countries or territories, known as country mandates, or on major phenomena of human rights violations worldwide, known as thematic mandates. Currently, there are 36 thematic and 10 country mandates. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights provides these mechanisms with personnel, policy, research and logistical support for the discharge of their mandates. Various activities are undertaken by special procedures, including responding to individual complaints, conducting studies, providing advice on technical cooperation at the country level, and engaging in general promotional activities. Special procedures are either an individual (called "Special Rapporteur" or "Independent Expert") or a working group usually composed of five members (one from each region). The mandates of the special procedures are established and defined by the resolution creating them. Mandate-holders of the special procedures serve in their personal capacity, and do not receive salaries or any other financial compensation for their work. The independent status of the mandate-holders is crucial in order to be able to fulfil their functions in all impartiality. Most Special Procedures receive information on specific allegations of human rights violations and send urgent appeals or letters of allegation to governments asking for clarification. (Source: Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council, Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights, available at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/SP/Pages/Welcomepage.aspx) 5.4.1 Possibilities and Limitations of the Special Procedures Since special procedures are mechanisms with an independent mandate, there are several possibilities with regard to their effective use to raise violations of women’s rights. In many cases individuals and NGOs may send an ‘urgent appeal’ (where there is imminent risk of harm) or a letter of allegation (‘where the harm has already occurred’) on individual cases to the Special Rapporteur with the mandate on the thematic issue that is most relevant to the violation. If the facts of the case fall under the competence of the thematic issue of more than one Special Rapporteurs, the letter may be sent simultaneously to several special rapporteurs to explore possibilities of sending a joint communication to the government concerned. REDRESS | INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TREATIES 53