CEDAW/C/58/D/47/2012 7.5 The information included by the author in her initial communication regarding the context of the events is important to show that the lack of diligence in her case is typical of the lack of diligence that habitually characterizes domestic violence cases. When there is evidence of systematic patterns of violence against women, or when the incidence of violence against women is inordinately high, as reflected in a high rate of domestic violence, it is clear that the State knows or should know of the risks faced by women who have complained of violence from their partners or former partners. Consequently it is unacceptable for the State to argue that the risk faced by the author and her daughter was unforeseeable. The State not only knew of the situation in Spain with regard to domestic violence, but also knew specifically about the situation of the author and her daughter. 7.6 In order to discharge its duty of diligence, it is not enough for the State to adopt legislation on the subject; it is necessary for the legislation to be applied. In Spain, State negligence in protecting women and minors from domestic violence persists to the present time, despite the adoption of legislative measures. In addition, legislation is still lacking to establish a system of redress for victims when there has been negligence. The law is also deficient in regard to protecting minors who live in violent settings and who are therefore also victims of the violence. 7.7 The State party makes no comment on the lack of a satisfactory assessment of the best interests of the child or the violation of her right to be heard in judicial proceedings. On many occasions Andrea showed fear of her father, owing to the climate of violence to which she had been exposed and she consistently rejected physical and emotional contact with him. This meant that the authorities and courts had to evaluate whether the visits with her father respected her right to life and to live free of violence, in addition to the principle of giving priority to the interests of the child. 7.8 The author requests the Committee to make the following recommendations to the State party: (a) complete redress and/or appropriate compensation, including, inter alia, payment with interest of unpaid child support; reimbursement with interest for the rent the author had to pay during the three years she was denied use of the family dwelling; pecuniary and non-pecuniary costs; symbolic redress, including, inter alia, the creation of a fund in memory of Andrea for child victims of domestic violence, tailored to organizations active in that field; (b) compensation to the author for physical and mental damages; (c) impartial and exhaustive investigation into the failures that occurred in implementing orders of protection, including ascertaining the responsibility of public officials; (d) public apology to the author for the failures in protecting her and her daughter; (e) impartial and exhaustive investigation into the failures that occurred regarding Andrea’s right to be heard; (f) impartial and exhaustive investigation into the failures that occurred regarding the authorization of unsupervised visits. The author also asks that a recommendation be made to the State party to review its legislation on domestic violence, including aspects relating to the application of measures of protection, response to complaints of domestic violence and visiting and custody rights of an abusive parent. Deliberations of the Committee Consideration of admissibility 8.1 In accordance with rule 64 of its rules of procedure, the Committee is to decide whether the communication is admissible under the Optional Protocol to 14-59288 13