A/HRC/13/56 629. The United States of America hoped that the State’s engagement in the universal periodic review process represented an opportunity to begin an in-depth dialogue on human rights issues. It remained concerned by reports of human rights abuses, including of extrajudicial execution, torture, the systematic deprivation of due process, the denial of freedom of speech, expression, movement and religion, forced labour and government-led mobilization campaigns, and about the abduction issue. It noted the State’s willingness to consider establishing an independent human rights mechanism and urged it to accept technical assistance from OHCHR and seek accreditation from the International Coordinating Committee of National Institutions. It also urged the State to join ILO, ratify its core conventions and allow related monitoring. It further urged the State to expand its efforts to protect women’s rights and to invite the special rapporteurs on violence against women and on torture to visit the country. 630. Qatar noted the effective participation of the State in the universal periodic review. It encouraged the State to continue its efforts to promote and protect human rights. It hoped for a dialogue and strengthened cooperation between the State and United Nations mechanisms in order to protect human rights and preserve the dignity of all. 631. China was pleased to note that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea attached importance to the universal periodic review outcome and continued to pay great attention to the development of social, economic and cultural rights, building the education system, the medical system, protecting the rights of vulnerable groups and achieving the Millennium Development Goals. National disasters, food and financial crises had had a negative impact on development. China therefore hoped that the international community would objectively assess the human rights situation in the country and support it in its efforts to achieve economic development and improve living standards. 632. France stated that, like other delegations, it failed to understand which of the 117 recommendations had been accepted. It recalled that, at this stage of the process, the position on recommendations should be clear and transparent and thus put the question to the State delegation, expecting an immediate reply to allow the Council to give its views on the adoption of the Working Group report. France concluded that, without a clear response, the State could not be seen as having cooperated with the Council. 633. Sri Lanka hoped that the State would continue to make all efforts to implement the conclusions and recommendations of the report. The creation of a conducive environment was essential to further the promotion and protection of human rights, and Sri Lanka hoped that international mechanisms, such as the universal periodic review, would facilitate the achievement of this end. 3. General comments made by other relevant stakeholders 634. Human Rights Watch stated that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had demonstrated neither the political commitment nor the requisite understanding of what it meant to comply with international human rights standards. Repression was so severe that the country lacked any independent civil society organizations. Numerous people who had escaped had testified how the Government systematically suppressed freedom of speech, the press, assembly and other freedoms. It expressed concern about the existence of labour camps, public executions and torture, and called on the Council to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur. 635. Interfaith International, in a joint statement with Rencontre africaine pour la défense des droits de l’homme, stated that the rejection of half of the recommendations did not reassure the Council about the political will to implement the accepted recommendations. It urged the State to cooperate with the special procedures of the Council, and exhorted it to respect ILO standards and ensure freedom of the press. 174