CAT/C/66/D/757/2016 5.3 The complainant notes that the State party recognizes that many women are not sufficiently independent to avoid female genital mutilation. The best example is the complainant’s mother, who was not able to avoid the procedure even at the age of 19. This shows that the risk of being subjected to female genital mutilation comes not just from parents but also from the extended family. The complainant further notes that the State party does not provide any information on possible ways to make a living, in particular on opportunities for making a living in Abidjan, in cases where parents decide to leave their home town to protect their daughter from becoming a victim of female genital mutilation and especially in cases where it is not two parents who are involved but a single mother, like in the complainant’s case. The fact that the complainant’s mother also suffers from mental problems makes it even more difficult for her to care for and protect her daughter from female genital mutilation. 5.4 The complainant rejects the State party’s assessment that the present case is different from F.B. v. Netherlands. She notes that several relevant factors need to be taken into consideration in assessing the risks of female genital mutilation, including the status of a single mother and how well the authorities can protect a woman in a country where such mutilation is prevalent. 5.5 As to the complainant’s mother’s suicide attempts, the complainant submits that the State party was well aware of them, as one of them happened at the application centre right after the negative decision was handed down in her asylum case. She considers that she has met the burden of proof by providing to the court all the medical information regarding her mother’s health. The State party, however, has refused to take this information into consideration. Further observations by the State party 6.1 On 25 October 2018, the State party submitted its further observations on the merits of the complaint. The State party notes that since the Government submitted its observations in 2017, the NGO 28 Too Many has published a report that provides an overview of the most recent data, developments and information concerning the practice and prevalence of female genital mutilation in Côte d’Ivoire, disaggregated by region, age and ethnic group.12 The report cites a 2013 demographic study carried out by the National Institute of Statistics of Côte d’Ivoire and ICF International.13 The report, together with the study and the report’s other underlying sources, provides the following information that is relevant to the present case: (a) The prevalence of female genital mutilation in women aged 15–49 is 38.2 per cent. The north-west (79.5 per cent of women aged 15–49) and north (73.7 per cent) of Côte d’Ivoire have the highest prevalence of female genital mutilation, while the centre (12.2 per cent) and centre-east (15.5 per cent) have the lowest prevalence. Women aged 15– 49 who live in rural areas are slightly more likely to undergo female genital mutilation (38.8 per cent) than women who live in urban areas (37.7 per cent). Prevalence in the capital Abidjan is 36.1 per cent; (b) Female genital mutilation is practised in Côte d’Ivoire by people of all religions and ethnic groups. The ethnic group with the highest prevalence among women aged 15–49 is the Mandé, which in the north record a prevalence of 66.8 per cent and in the south a prevalence of 51 per cent; (c) Breaking down the most recent data by age group shows that the prevalence for women aged 45–49 is 46.9 per cent, while for the age group 15–19 it is 31.3 per cent; (d) Despite the fact that a small proportion of women may be cut after the age of 15, this data demonstrates a trend towards lower prevalence among younger women. 12 13 28 Too Many, “Côte d’Ivoire: the law and FGM” (August 2018). National Institute of Statistics and ICF International, Enquête Démographique et de Santé et à Indicateurs Multiples de Côte d’Ivoire 2011–2012 (Calverton, Maryland, 2012). 7