CRPD/C/20/D/23/2014 C. Committee’s consideration of the merits 8.1 The Committee has considered the present communication in the light of all the information that it has received, in accordance with article 5 of the Optional Protocol and rule 73 (1) of the Committee’s rules of procedure. Since the State party has not submitted any observations on the merits of the communication, due weight must be given to the author’s claims insofar as they have been substantiated.41 8.2 As regards the author’s complaint under article 5 of the Convention, the Committee notes his argument that he has been discriminated against on the basis of his disability, because the kind of violence he has suffered is a generalized practice in the State party, which only affects persons with albinism. The Committee also notes the author’s submission that he has been a victim of disability-based discrimination also as a result of the impunity with which the violent acts he has suffered has been treated to date. In this connection, the author submits that impunity characterizes most cases of violence perpetrated against persons with albinism, as the State party’s authorities consider that persons with albinism are linked to witchcraft and that witchcraft is a cultural practice that is generally accepted and with regard to which many prejudices still prevail in society. Finally, the Committee notes that the State party’s authorities have not taken the necessary measures to ensure an effective, complete and impartial investigation and prosecution of the perpetrators, and that no preventive or protective measures have been implemented in that regard. 8.3 The Committee recalls that under article 5 (1)–(3) of the Convention, States parties must ensure that all persons are equal before and under the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law, and must take all appropriate steps to ensure that reasonable accommodation is provided in order to promote equality and eliminate discrimination. In the present case, the Committee notes that the author was the victim of a violent crime that matches the characteristics of a practice exclusively affecting persons with albinism: on 14 October 2011, when he was 12 years old, he was attacked by a man with a machete who stole three of the fingers of his right hand. Also, his left shoulder was hacked with the machete, preventing him from using both his right hand and left arm. Since then, the author’s access to justice has been significantly limited: no investigative action seems to have been taken by the competent authorities after the withdrawal of the first prosecution, and his case still meets with total impunity more than six years after the criminal attack that he suffered. 8.4 The Committee considers that the State party cannot avoid its responsibilities under the Convention for the mere fact that some of its authorities, such as Geita Magistrates’ Court, have already dealt with or are still dealing with the matter, while it is clear that the remedies pending in the State party have been unduly prolonged and would appear to be ineffective.42 It also considers that the State party’s failure to prevent and punish such acts has resulted in a situation that puts the author and other persons with albinism in a situation of particular vulnerability and prevents them from living in society on an equal basis with others. In the absence of any explanation from the State party on these issues, the Committee considers that the author has been a victim of a form of violence that exclusively targets persons with albinism. The Committee therefore concludes that the author has been a victim of a direct discrimination based on his disability, in violation of article 5 of the Convention. 8.5 The Committee notes the author’s claim that the State party has failed to pay adequate attention to his particular vulnerability as a child with albinism, while children and young persons with albinism are frequently subjected to acts of cruelty and torture in the State party, that the author had to stop going to school for fear of being persecuted, and that he suffered attacks on two occasions. In that connection, the Committee recalls that, under article 7 (1) of the Convention, States parties must take all necessary measures to ensure the full enjoyment by children with disabilities of all human rights and fundamental freedoms on an equal basis with others. The Committee observes that by failing to provide 41 42 10 Yrusta and del Valle Yrusta v. Argentina, para. 10.1; and X v. United Republic of Tanzania, para. 8.1. X v. United Republic of Tanzania, para. 8.4.