A/HRC/34/33 discussion was to share these experiences and explore how to make existing mechanisms more effective. 50. Laura-Maria Crăciunean-Tatu, a panellist, stressed that, in implementing policies and rights, both civil and political rights had to be taken into account, as well as economic, social and cultural rights. The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action reaffirmed the universality, indivisibility and interdependency of these two categories of rights. 51. One of the challenges that Romania had to face in its transition to democracy was the protection of minorities. Romania has 20 recognized minorities, including the Roma. Besides general rights, specific rights were recognized and guaranteed by international treaties, bilateral agreements and the Constitution. 52. The State’s current Roma strategy for 2015-2020 made reference to important human rights principles, including the active participation of the Roma population in the design and implementation of policies concerning them, and the principles of transparency, non-discrimination human dignity. It was mainly focused on the delivery of education, health care, housing and social services. In 2001, the National Council for Combating Discrimination was established as an autonomous and independent body with quasi-judicial competence. Most of the decisions made by the National Council referred to acts of discrimination against Roma, including hate speech. 53. Ms. Crăciunean-Tatu stated that, in the case of Romania, the presence of a strong national human rights institution was crucial for the effective implementation of antidiscrimination measures. The National Council for Combating Discrimination had improved the general understanding and awareness of the specific challenges faced by the Roma minority, and its work had helped to ensure the mainstreaming of human rights in public policies. 54. The discussant Luis Espinosa-Salas, Councillor at the Permanent Mission of Ecuador to the United Nations Office at Geneva, posed the question of whether anyone present had ever been asked about the initiatives of and the discussions held by the Human Rights Council, and whether these deliberations had any purpose. The question to be answered was what impact the decisions of the Council had on the daily lives of ordinary people. At each session, the Council adopted an average of 30 resolutions; around 900 resolutions had therefore been adopted since the Council replaced the Commission on Human Rights 10 years earlier. This observation had motivated Romania, Algeria, Ecuador and Italy to question the added value that discussions on human rights by the Council had for the international community. 55. According to Mr. Espinosa-Salas, many States suffered from a compliance gap: they commit to a number of human rights undertakings but are overwhelmed when it came to putting them into practice. All States that fell into the compliance gap; if it were not the case, the sessions of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review would be totally different. No State had been exempt from recommendations on the implementation of human rights. Mr. Espinosa-Salas observed that the situation of the Roma was not unique to Romania, but was a matter of concern throughout Europe. 56. Mr. Espinosa-Salas agreed with Ms. Crăciunean-Tatu that economic, social and cultural rights and civil and political rights had to be viewed on an equal footing. They should not be separated when human rights were being mainstreamed. To that end, a good diagnosis and accurate indicators were necessary. The voices of affected groups also had to be heard; for example, when Ecuador was exploring ways to address economic and social inequalities, it produced, as a first step a human rights atlas, which clearly identified the areas where improvements were needed in providing goods and services, such as housing, health, food and education. It also showed the areas where human rights were at risk. Mr. Espinosa-Salas observed that, while human rights are universal, the distinctive features of 11