186. The Court recalls that the State must prevent the occurrence of human rights violations such as those described in this case and, therefore, must adopt all pertinent legal, administrative or other types of measures to that effect.285 187. The Court positively values the regulatory advances made by the State after the facts of this case. In particular, the aforementioned Maria da Penha Law, which constitutes an important international reference in preventing and combating violence against women, and the Femicide Law, designed to make homicides committed against women because of their gender more visible and to send a message regarding the special gravity of this crime. It is also worth mentioning the amendments to the Brazilian Criminal Code introduced by Law 11.106/2005, which exclude from the legal framework discriminatory terms and expressions in relation to women, among other measures. 188. Likewise, the Court appreciates the fact that there are currently various programs, projects and initiatives in Brazil aimed at combating violence and discrimination against women. In this regard, in 2003, the Special Secretariat of Policies for Women was created, a thematic body linked to the Presidency of the Republic, which is responsible for the coordination, design and implementation of policies for women at the federal level. In addition, in 2006, the National Policy for Combating Violence against Women was introduced, which included comprehensive measures for the prevention, protection and punishment of violence against women. In 2013, the “Mulher, Viver sem Violência”(“Women’s Program, living without violence") was launched by the Secretariat for Women’s Policies, with the aim of consolidating the intersectoral network of specialized services and mainstreaming the national policy. 189. However, according to the limited official and non-official data available (supra para. 47), and based on the expert opinions of Wânia Pasinato, Carmen Hein and Soraia Mendes, women in Brazil, especially Afrodescendant and poor women, continue to be immersed in a context of discrimination and structural violence.286 The Court will take this into account when determining the guarantees of non-repetition in this case. E.1 Statistics on gender violence 190. Based on the context in which the facts of this case are framed, as early as 2006, the precariousness of national statistical data on violence against women was noted.287 Fourteen years later, the expert witness Carmen Hein reaffirmed this view when she stated that “there is no national system of records on femicides that is comparable and allows for the analysis and cross-checking of data for a diagnosis of the deaths of women and the development of effective public policies.”288 Cf. Case of Suárez Rosero v. Ecuador. Merits, supra, para. 106, Case of Workers of the Fireworks Factory in Santo Antônio de Jesus and their Families v. Brazil, supra, para. 285. 286 Cf. Expert opinion of Carmen Hein provided at the public hearing held on February 3 and 4, 2021, before the Court; Expert opinion of Wânia Pasinato rendered by affidavit on January 12, 2021, and expert opinion rendered by Soraia da Rosa Mendes, supra. 287 Cf. PERES, Andréia (Coord.). O Progresso das Mulheres no Brasil. (Women’s Progress in Brazil) UNIFEM, Ford Foundation, CEPIA: Brasilia. 2006, p. 260. Available at: http://www.mpsp.mp.br/portal/page/portal/Cartilhas/Progresso%20das%20Mulheres%20no%20Brazil.pdf. 288 Cf. Expert opinion presented by Carmen Hein in Public hearing held on February 3 and 4, 2021, before the Inter-American Court. In addition, the expert witness Wânia Pasinato stated that: “the absence of accessible, reliable, national data, disaggregated by sex, race /color and age is an obstacle for the Brazilian State to develop and implement adequate public policies compatible with the seriousness of the violation of women's rights. Obtaining quality data and statistics helps to measure the seriousness of violence in women's lives, but also to measure and evaluate the social and economic costs and their impact on the lives of women, future generations, society and governments. Cf. Expert opinion of Wânia Pasinato rendered by affidavit, supra (evidence file, folio 10320). 285 -52-