A/HRC/33/26 intimidations and reprisals against those cooperating with the Council; providing more space for civil society to organize events on the margins of the Council; promoting the participation of a greater number of non-governmental organizations in the Council; and advancing constructive dialogue. 29. Several speakers highlighted the need for the Council to respond adequately to situations on the ground and focus more attention on early warning and prevention of situations that can lead to mass atrocity crimes, including genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. In that regard, they noted the utility of information provided by the High Commissioner, special procedure mandate holders, the treaty bodies and civil society. Some speakers called on the Council to commit to addressing human rights situations raised by the Secretary-General, the High Commissioner or the special procedure mandate holders, and addressing other human rights situations based on objective criteria. They also called for accountability for human rights violations to be upheld. C. Responses and concluding remarks 30. The moderator noted that, during the discussion it had been noted that the performance of the Council in some areas seemed to have been reasonable and there had been no mention of any failure. The Council had been encouraged to do better in emergencies and in prevention. There had been a call for expansion of civil society space. Comments had been made on the struggle against impunity, but also encouragement had been given for much greater education and promotion of human rights. Some concerns had also been expressed about the performance of the Council with regard to balance, universality and indivisibility. The question was where the Council should improve. 31. Ms. Dupuy Lasserre said it was necessary to go beyond the discourse of cultural diversity versus human rights; cultural diversity could not be invoked to undermine those rights that were inherent to all people. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is an imperative norm in international law and therefore the Council must never passively accept acts of slavery, violence against women, hate crimes and so on. The Council had to act preventively and generate national capacity and the necessary political will. 32. Mr. Henczel stressed that everything necessary must be done to save the universality of the universal periodic review mechanism and to avoid the existing tendency towards bilateralization of the process; territorial disputes, for example, should not be raised during the review. The Office of the High Commissioner and the Council should confront the growing workload, including the growing number of panels, debates and resolutions, which most delegations were not able to follow, particularly small and medium-sized missions in Geneva. 33. Mr. Uhomoibhi called on the Council to strengthen its role in preventing crises. As there was no alternative to the Human Rights Council, a world without the Council could not be contemplated. The Council must stand out as a global moral compass and, as a last bastion for the promotion and protection of human rights, it must not be ambushed for political purposes or vested interests. The moment that it compromised its objectivity, impartiality and neutrality, the Council would lose its credibility. 34. Mr. Van Meeuwen said that the political context in the final days of the previous Commission on Human Rights had been extremely bad. The Council preserved the universality of the human rights conventions and established itself in a central position on human rights. It was important to focus on the core task of the Council, being effective on the ground. The universal periodic review delivered results and was a concrete contribution of the Council to improving effectiveness on the ground. The biggest challenge for the 8