CEDAW/C/55/D/33/2011 author’s counsel a written reminder in which it reiterated its request for information and asked him to submit the requested information not later than 31 March 2011. 2.10 In the light of a partial reply received from the author’s counsel on 29 March 2011, the Working Group again requested him, on 4 April 2011, to provide the Committee with independent evidence or research supporting the author’s claims that the Mogishu ethnic group/tribe indeed existed in Uganda, that women belonging to the Mogishu ethnic group/tribe continued to be subjected to circumcision in Uganda and that female circumcision was being practised on adult women who gave birth to a child or children. The author’s counsel was asked to submit the requested information not later than 31 May 2011. A partial reply was received on 31 May 2011 (see paras. 3.4 and 3.5). Complaint 3.1 The author invokes, without advancing any specific arguments, a violation of articles 1, 2 (c), 2 (d) and 3 of the Convention and submits that, according to the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, gender-based violence can be a form of persecution with regard to women as a specific “social group” 3 and that, according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, circumcision is practised in Uganda by some tribes. 4 Furthermore, according to the information from the Female Genital Cutting Education and Networking Project, 5 the problem remains widespread and the tradition of female circumcision continues to be practised among some tribes. She adds that victims cannot request protection since circumcision is not outlawed in Uganda. 3.2 According to the author, circumcision in Uganda is clan-related and does not depend on age. She must be circumcised so that she belongs to her father’s clan. Her father used to live on the border with Kenya but moved to Kampala on an unspecified date. The author fears being circumcised by her father and his family if she returns to Uganda. She claims that the Ugandan authorities are corrupt and unwilling to help her, although she has never sought official protection. 3.3 Being a woman belonging to a clan — Moghiso/Mogishu — where circumcisions are carried out, and not having previously been circumcised, the author argues that she is in danger of treatment that would be in violation of article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights if deported by force to Uganda. She submits that it would also amount to a violation of her right to privacy under article 17 of the Covenant. Since such treatment is due to her status as a woman, the author also invokes a violation of articles 2, 3 and 26 of the Covenant and states that she should be protected against such discriminatory treatment. 3.4 The author submits that Bagishu and Mugisu are names for the same tribe and provides a description of the ritual of circumcision among Bagishu men. She states that, once a boy has been circumcised, he becomes a true and mature person. In __________________ 3 4 5 13-42827 Reference is made to the decision of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada in relation to case T93-12198 (no copy on file). Reference is also made to the 2002 concluding observations of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women on the third periodic report of Uganda (A/57/38), paras. 135-136, and to the 2005 concluding observations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child on the second periodic report of Uganda (CRC/C/UGA/CO/2), paras. 55-56. Female Genital Cutting Education and Networking Project, “Uganda: Female circumcision hurts women’s dignity”, undated. 5/19