CEDAW/C/73/D/100/2016 work was carried out with the perpetrators in the present case, even though the authorities were fully aware of the continuing domestic violence situations in both families. The inaction of the authorities constitutes a violation of article 2 (b), (e) and (f) of the Convention, taking into consideration the Committee’s general recommendations No. 19 and No. 24 (1999) on women and health. 3.10 The authors further note that they were unable to receive free legal assistance in their domestic violence cases. X. requested legal aid from the centre for public assistance for families and children in the Krasnogvardeisky District of Saint Petersburg, but was advised to hire a private lawyer. Y. sought the assistance of the Nadezhda Centre in Moscow, but was able to obtain only a free legal consultation because the centre does not provide representation in proceedings before law enforcement agencies and courts. On 21 November 2011, a federal law on free legal aid was passed, but it does not cover domestic violence cases. The refusal of the State party to give adequate consideration to legal aid in domesti c violence cases constitutes to a breach of article 2 (c) of the Convention, taking into consideration the Committee’s general recommendations No. 19, No. 28 and No. 33. 3.11 The authors contend that the authorities considered their claims to be minor episodes and private family matters, and the authorities have not shown due diligence by carrying out effective and prompt investigations and ensuring the punishment of the perpetrators. X. was not questioned in connection with any of the complaints that she filed with the police. Her complaints were given only a cursory examination, with the police limiting the case file to reports on the impossibility of interrogating the author’s husband and witnesses. No medical records of the injuries sustained were requested from the medical centres. The police consistently refused to open criminal cases on the matter, even though the prosecutor’s office considered that the material was sufficient. Similarly, notwithstanding that Y. had repeatedly submitted domestic violence complaints to the police, the inquiry conducted was only cursory in nature. Medical records regarding the incidents in February 2013 were not retrieved until April 2014. In addition, an evaluation of the medical records regarding the incident of 27 February 2013 was not conducted until two and a half years later, in May 2015. The author was never informed of the outcome of the evaluation. No adequate inquiry was carried out regarding Y.’s report of August 2014. The police did not retrieve her statements or those of her husband or witnesses until December 2014, after she submitted a complaint for negligence. An evaluation of the medical records for the case was not ordered until June 2015. She has no information on the outcome of the proceedings. According to the authors, the refusal of the authorities to conduct prompt and effective investigations into their claims and bring the perpetrators to justice amounts to a violation of article 2 (b) to (f) and of article 5 (a), taking into consideration the Committee’s general recommendations No. 19 and No. 28. 3.12 The authors claim that they have been deprived, through national law and practice, of effective domestic remedies and access to compensation and rehabilitation with respect to their criminal complaint s on domestic violence. Their complaints were not properly investigated; instead, the authorities relied upon stereotypical views in their approach. In accordance with the Committee ’s general recommendation No. 28, women whose rights under the Convention h ave been violated are entitled to reparation. In the light of the authorities ’ persistent refusal to investigate, the authors were deprived of the right to compensation. As to rehabilitation, Y. has not been offered any rehabilitation by the State, and X. received rehabilitative treatment provided by a non-governmental organization. Their suffering was exacerbated by the ineffective investigation of their complaints, the failure to inform them of the progress of the inquiries and the courts��� upholding of the decisions of the police. The deprivation of effective domestic remedies and access to compensation and rehabilitation constitute violations of article 2 (b) and (e) of the Convention. 19-15442 9/18