A/HRC/27/70 2014.6 Of 205 recommendations made, 163 were accepted by the Government and 42 were noted. 64. Between the review by the Working Group in January 2014 and the adoption of the outcome, Cambodia changed its position on eight recommendations from “accepted” to “noted”, which the Special Rapporteurs regrettably believes reflects reluctance of the Government to accept and therefore commit itself to act on important human rights issues, including four that it explicitly “rejected”.7 He notes that many of the recommendations noted in this round of universal periodic review are equivalent to some that it had accepted — and thereby committed itself to implement — in the first round in 2009. 65. The Special Rapporteur draws attention to the fact that some of the recommendations that Cambodia did not accept are actually binding obligations under human rights treaties ratified by Cambodia. Notably, the establishment of an independent national preventive mechanism is an obligation under the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which Cambodia ratified in 2007. It is simply not an option to decline to establish an independent national preventive mechanism. Other binding obligations include ensuring the independence of the judiciary; freedom of expression and information, including on the Internet; freedom of assembly; prohibiting the use of excessive force against protestors during demonstrations; and adequate housing and access to basic services, health care and employment for those displaced from their land. 66. The Special Rapporteur recalls that States parties to international human rights treaties are under obligation to strive for and achieve the progressive realization of human rights; in other words, regression on treaty-defined human rights is not permitted. Therefore, he urges the Government of Cambodia to revisit the recommendations that it “noted”, with a view to reaffirming its commitment to implement them. The independence of national human rights institutions 67. The Special Rapporteur consulted with a wide range of stakeholders during his last two missions about their views regarding the need, or desirability, of establishing an independent national human institution. An independent national institution that conforms to the Paris Principles is responsible for monitoring and advising the Government on all human rights matters and is empowered to investigate individual complaints has proven to be an effective protection mechanism in many countries, including within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. He considers that such an institution could also prove useful in filling an important gap in Cambodia. 68. While there seemed to be a widely shared consensus on the need for such a mechanism, concern was expressed in different quarters on whether it was possible under current conditions to create a truly independent national human rights commission and/or appoint truly independent people with the requisite credentials to serve as members. 69. The approach of the Government has been to establish governmental rather than independent bodies. The overarching institution is the Cambodia Human Rights Committee, which reports to the Council of Ministers. Other bodies that are focused on specific groups of persons have also been established, such as the Cambodian National Council for Women, the Cambodian National Council for Children and the Disability 6 7 16 The report of the Working Group is contained in document A/HRC/26/16. Within the rules of the Council as stipulated by its resolution 5/1, they would be considered as merely “noted” since the rules do not provide for rejection.