A/HRC/28/10 99. Brunei Darussalam welcomed Kazakhstan’s initiative to enhance the right to social security and was encouraged by efforts to protect its environment. It made recommendations. 100. Canada welcomed progress in combating trafficking for the purpose of sexual and labour exploitation. It urged Kazakhstan to continue those efforts. Canada made recommendations. 101. Chile noted the alignment of the Ombudsman with the Paris Principles. The Kazakhstan 2050 Strategy should improve the protection of all human rights in cooperation with United Nations human rights mechanisms. It made recommendations. 102. Mexico welcomed Kazakhstan’s standing invitation to the special procedures of the Human Rights Council and commended the steps taken to implement the recommendations made by various human rights bodies. Mexico made recommendations. 103. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea commended tolerance between Kazakhstan’s ethnic groups and noted that the Fourth Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions would be held there. It made a recommendation. 104. Mauritania noted that the National Human Rights Action Plan 2009-2012 had laid the cornerstone for the protection of fundamental human rights and freedoms. It expected the adoption of a new plan, including measures to protect human rights defenders. 105. Morocco commended Kazakhstan’s cooperation with the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), the action taken to establish a national preventive mechanism against torture and the priority given to the right to a healthy environment. Morocco made recommendations. 106. The delegation stated that over 100 ethnic groups peacefully coexisted in Kazakhstan and that the rights and interests of all ethnic and minority groups were protected through policy and legislative measures. Given its experience and the positive evaluation of its policies for inter-ethnic harmony by international organizations, including the United Nations, Kazakhstan stood ready to share its experience with others. 107. All complaints of torture were considered by a special prosecutor, who received complaints through a secure post-box placed in every detention facility. The definition of torture under the new Criminal Procedure Code complied with the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Evidence obtained through torture was inadmissible. Victims of torture were eligible for compensation. 108. In response to questions on the freedom of assembly, the delegation stated that the possibility of restricting the freedom of assembly was set out in domestic legislation and adhered to international human rights standards. The need for improving the current legislation has been acknowledged, and work was ongoing to improve the legislative framework for democratic freedoms. Many peaceful assemblies had taken place in the past without prior approval. Article 400 of the new Criminal Procedure Code provided for lesser penalties with respect to infringements of the law on public assemblies as compared with the previous Code. 109. The delegation stated that a national preventive mechanism on torture had been introduced for all places of detention. A coordinating council had been established, whose members were drawn exclusively from civil society and included lawyers, doctors and social workers. Persons working for the national preventive mechanism enjoyed unlimited access to a wide range of places of detention and the mechanism had been allocated significant resources. 12