Teresa Fernández Paredes 81 obligation of result, but one of means. The authorities must have taken the reasonable steps available to them to secure the evidence concerning the incident, including, inter alia, eyewitness testimony, forensic evidence, and so on. Any deficiency in the investiga­ tion which undermines its ability to establish the cause of injuries or the identity of the persons responsible will risk falling foul of this standard, and a requirement of prompt­ ness and reasonable expedition is implicit in this context. In cases under Article 3 of the Convention where the effectiveness of the official investigation has been at issue, the Court has often assessed whether the authorities reacted promptly to the complaints at the relevant time. Consideration has been given to the opening of investigations, delays in taking statements, and to the length of time taken for the initial investigation141” Therefore, there is a clear, positive obligation of States to investigate and apply effectively a crim­ inal-law system punishing all forms of rape and sexual abuse committed by private individuals. However, the Court has hesitated in qualifying these acts as torture and just refers to ill-treatment. 4. The obligation of investigation in the African Human Rights System While this article has focused, in the interest of brevity, on regional human rights standards in the two regional systems that are currently most developed, the Inter-American Human Rights System and the European Human Rights System, this subsection will provide a brief review of the jurisprudence of the African Human Rights System as regards torture. In the African Human Rights system, the right not to be subjected to torture or other forms of ill-treatment as stated in Article 5 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, is part of the right to human dignity: “Every individual shall have the right to the respect of the dignity inherent in a human being and to the recognition of his legal status. All forms of exploitation and degrada­ tion of man particularly slavery, slave trade, torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading pun­ ishment and treatment shall be prohibited.142” Article 4 of the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa, the Maputo Protocol, also includes a protection against “all forms of exploitation, cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment and treatment143” against women and girls. The Maputo Protocol, therefore, broadens Article 5´s protection “to ensure the protection of every woman’s right to respect for her dignity and protection of women from all forms of violence, particularly sexual and verbal violence.”144 Following these provisions, it can be argued that the prohibition against inhuman treatment includes acts committed both by public and private individuals145. Ibid., para. 85 African (Banjul) Charter on Human and Peoples’ rights (Adopted 27 June 1981, OAU Doc. CAB/LEG/67/3 rev. 5, 21 I.L.M. 58 (1982), entered into force 21 October 1986, http://www.achpr.org/instruments/achpr/ 143 Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa, July 01, 2003, http://www.achpr.org/files/instruments/womenprotocol/achpr_instr_proto_women_eng.pdf 144 “j) all acts perpetrated against women which cause or could cause them physical, sexual, psychological, and economic harm, including the threat to take such acts; or to undertake the imposition of arbitrary restrictions on or deprivation of fundamental freedoms in private or public life in peace time and during situations of armed conflicts or of war”. 145 OMCT Handbook series.–The Prohibition of Torture and Ill-Treatment in the African Human Rights System: A Handbook for Victims and their Advocates (volume 3), p.55, 71-72 “The Mauritania cases, for example, comprised five consolidated communications arising from developments in Mauritania between 1986 and 1992 (…) These communications alleged the existence in that State of slavery and analogous practices, and of institutionalized racial discrimination perpetrated by the ruling Beydane (Moor) community against the more populous black community. The cases alleged that black Mauritanians were enslaved, routinely evicted or displaced from 141 142