CEDAW/C/89/D/170/2021 admissibility of the communication, the Committee declares it admissible as raising issues under article 2, read in the light of articles 3, 12 (1), 14 (2) (b) and 24 of the Convention. The Committee also considers that the complainants’ allegations concerning the lack of information about their forced sterilization raise substantive issues under article 10 (h) of the Convention and declares them admissible. Consideration of the merits 8.1 The Committee has considered the present communication in the light of all the information made available to it by the authors and by the State party, as provided for in article 7 (1) of the Optional Protocol. 8.2 The Committee takes note of the authors’ allegations that they were victims of forced sterilizations performed by public officials as part of a State birth control policy and that the violations committed against them have been neither investigated nor remedied, although they have been recognized as victims in the Registry of Victims of Forced Sterilization. The Committee also takes note of the State party’s argument that the Programme on Reproductive Health and Family Planning does not in itself constitute a discriminatory regulation, since it was not intended solely for women but for the general public, and was focused not only on voluntary surgical contraception but also on the overall promotion of sexual and reproductive health. It further takes note of the fact that, according to the State party, voluntary surgical contraception was carried out on both men and women and did not target a specific economic sector or ethnic group. The Committee takes note of the authors’ argument that 93 per cent of the sterilizations were performed on women and that the vast majority of those women were Indigenous, from low-income groups and/or from rural areas, and that the practice of forced sterilization is in itself discriminatory against women and one of the most severe forms of gender-based violence. 33 It also takes note of the fact that, according to the authors, their forced sterilizations were carried out as part of a systematic and generalized attack against rural women of peasant or Indigenous origin, and that the policy resulted in the nullificati on and substitution of their reproductive autonomy. Lastly, the Committee observes that male and female sterilization differ substantially in terms of the nature of the procedure and the surgical risks involved, and that the risks associated with female st erilization are generally considered higher than those associated with male sterilization. 34 The Committee notes, in particular, the context in which the authors were sterilized, namely, by non-specialized medical personnel and in inadequate sanitary conditions, which constitutes a form of sexual discrimination. 8.3 The Committee recalls that, in its general recommendation No. 35, it stated that violations of women’s sexual and reproductive health and rights, such as forced sterilization, are forms of gender-based violence that, depending on the circumstances, may amount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. 35 According to the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, “some women may experience multiple forms of discrimination on the basis of their sex or other status or identity. Targeting ethnic and racial minorities, women from marginalized communities and women with __________________ 33 34 35 24-19966 General recommendation No. 35 (2017) on gender-based violence against women, paras. 15 and 16. World Health Organization, Female Sterilization: A Guide for Provision of Services , p. 72. General recommendation No. 35 (2017), para. 18; general recommendation No. 19 (1992) on violence against women, paras. 1 and 22; L.C. v. Peru (CEDAW/C/50/D/22/2009), para. 8.18; report of the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (A/HRC/31/57), para. 45; and United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (General Assembly resolution 61/295, annex), art. 2. See also the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health (A/61/338), paras. 13 and 17 (b). 15/19