A/HRC/47/38 conflict, 66 many violations of sexual and reproductive health rights continue to be either neglected or tolerated and occur with impunity. 36. Reliable data concerning the accessibility, availability and quality of sexual and reproductive health services, disaggregated by sex, gender, age and other grounds, remain scarce in general and in particular in humanitarian settings.67 States continue to lag behind in the provision of those services based on precise plans, indicators, benchmarks and regular reviews, despite it being an integral component of States’ human rights obligations and crucial to ensuring accountability.68 37. The Working Group emphasizes that accountability is needed at multiple levels and may take various forms, including administrative, social, political and legal. The implementation of a “circle of accountability” is a promising practice, as envisioned in the United Nations technical guidance on the application of a human right-based approach to the implementation of policies and programmes to reduce preventable maternal morbidity and mortality. 69 It brings together local communities and governmental and other actors in a community-led monitoring effort to ensure accountability for sexual and reproductive health rights.70 38. The Working Group notes as a promising practice the interventions by national human rights institutions and courts aimed at protecting sexual and reproductive health rights during situations of crisis, including during the COVID-19 pandemic, by drawing attention to shortcomings in the design and/or implementation of crisis responses. 71 Another promising practice is the conduct of independent investigations by national and specially appointed international commissions that have exposed wide-ranging violations of the sexual and reproductive health rights of women and girls in various situations of crisis and offered clear guidance on reparations and structural reforms.72 39. Women and girls are entitled to receive adequate reparations, including restitution, compensation, satisfaction, rehabilitation and guarantees of non-repetition, for violations of their sexual and reproductive health rights, and States have a core obligation to ensure access to effective and transparent reparations. 73 However, women and girls continue to face a variety of barriers to access to justice in situations of crisis,74 from the lack of recognition of the harm caused to them as being a violation of human rights to the absence of procedures and formal mechanisms. The Working Group welcomes the judicial recognition of the harms caused by sexual and reproductive violence during conflict and the provision of reparations. 75 States have been held responsible for failing to protect the sexual and reproductive health rights of women and girls in cases concerning access to therapeutic abortion, 76 non- 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 See Kim Thuy Seelinger, “Close to home: a short history, and rough typology, of national courts prosecuting wartime sexual violence”, Journal of International Criminal Justice, vol. 18, No. 2; and Daniela Kravetz, “Accountability for sexual and gender-based violence during mass repression and in conflict the experiences of Argentina and Guatemala”, Journal of International Criminal Justice vol. 18, No. 2. See A/HRC/39/26. See Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, general recommendation No. 24 (1999); and Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, general comment No. 14 (2000). See A/HRC/21/22. See the submission by CARE and the Center for Reproductive Rights. See submissions by Procuraduría para la Defensa de los Derechos Humanos of El Salvador and National Human Rights Commission of India. See “Sexual and gender-based violence in Myanmar and the gendered impact of its ethnic conflicts”, conference room paper; A/HRC/41/18; https://reliefweb.int/report/south-sudan/access-healthsurvivors-conflict-related-sexual-violence-south-sudan-may-2020; and www.mmiwg-ffada.ca/finalreport/. See Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, general comment No. 14 (2000) and general comment No. 22 (2016). Among many others, see submissions by Argentina, Colombia, Greece and Mali and State of Palestine. Constitutional Court of Colombia, decision SU-599/19 of 11 December 2019. See L.C. v. Peru (CEDAW/C/50/D/22/2009). 11