Ms. Leah Barbia (CHR GEWHRC) expressed appreciation on the framework particularly on the discussion of GBV nuances on the ground and dimension of GBV issues which can be considered for identifying the entry point for fulfilling CHR mandates. She encouraged representatives from the regions to take note of data gathering methods and scope and limitations as well as the key themes and lessons from the pilot mapping to be able to manage the implementation later in their respective areas. On the validity of data and other narratives from FGDs and interviews Atty. Jeanne Ivy F. Abrina (CHR-R10) appreciated the discussion on methods as these are learned along the way. She cited that they have been doing narrative and systematic review and while there are narratives, these are not analyzed and consolidated with other regions in a national situation. Specifically, their region was able to document GBV and other discriminatory practices or policies on contracts that forbid pregnancy among rural health workers (RHW). She also raised the concern on data validity, “inbreeding” and who writes what and for whom in terms of the local narratives and references. Ms. Mesina dispels the challenge of having narratives and data from an international source or credible academic research, or popular icon. She reiterated that the GBV Observatory is a mechanism or platform for local narratives to be mainstreamed and popularized, for stories of local women who want to fight for justice or of someone who got tired of the struggle, dropped the case and decided to take on a new path. Under these circumstances, the CHR providing all mechanisms for access to justice and respecting the decision of the woman to drop the cases is still fulfilling the women’s human rights. Cases such as these can be validly documented and shared. Ms. Barbia (CHR GEWHRC) added that it may difficult to capture but it can be that one story is a story of many more, if not all women. Similarly, the GBV was, at a time, a problem without a name or label but which is experienced by many. Atty. Rubin (CHR GEWHRC) mentioned that one of the current funded researches will highlight the experiences of regional offices in handling cases as well as the gaps and access to justice issues through “hugot” or sensational cases. 19