A/HRC/29/40 Informal legal pluralism 59. Jurisdiction is exercised informally when jurisdictional powers are not the result of an express grant of judicial authority by the State. Such jurisdiction is generally not recognized by the State. Such situations may arise when religious, indigenous or customary authority is exercised by judges, arbitrators or other alternative dispute settlement procedures that are not authorized or tolerated by the State and/or of which the State is unaware. These systems operate without oversight by the State, and, while some may have been recognized previously in law, often under former colonial systems, they are now beyond State control. 60. When the State becomes aware of such informal systems, it must put in place oversight mechanisms and procedures for appeals to the State justice system to quash decisions that discriminate against women. The State must make an effort to provide alternatives to these informal legal systems, for example, by rendering the formal State system more accessible. 61. Plural legal systems create complex and confusing legal situations. Various United Nations treaty bodies have sought to show how these systems limit women’s enjoyment of the right to equality in their private and public lives, while acknowledging the richness of cultural diversity.42 Even if there is no special recognition by the State of informal legal systems or formal delegation of functions by the State to traditional chiefs, the State should extend its protection, as referred to in article 2 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. D. The role of the State in ensuring respect for women and girls’ right to equality in cultural and family life 62. The State has an obligation to respect women’s right to equality within the family and should eliminate any laws, including customary or religious laws, 43 that discriminate against women and any discriminatory acts carried out by State authorities. The obligation not to discriminate against women is direct and absolute. A State will be in violation of this obligation if it has a law that discriminates against women, regardless of whether its family law system is secular, religious or plural. 63. The State has a direct obligation to protect and respect women’s right to equality in all the forms of family law considered above. It is held responsible for any breach of its obligations, including in cases where it has, through its constitution, laws or judicial decisions, assigned jurisdiction over family law matters to a religious, indigenous or customary court, tribunal or authority. Moreover, the State has an obligation to exercise due diligence to guarantee and protect women’s right to equality in informal plural legal systems. 64. The State must refrain from adopting laws, policies, measures or regulations that discriminate directly or indirectly against women and girls and must ensure that its officials, and private actors, respect this obligation in all contexts, including those situations where women are most vulnerable (as refugees, migrants or stateless persons, for example). 65. The obligation of the State to protect women and girls’ right to equality in the family compels the authorities to prevent discrimination by private actors. Due diligence as a 42 43 GE.15-07003 Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, general recommendations Nos. 21, para. 13, and 29, paras. 13–14. Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, general recommendation No. 21, para. 44. 15