A/HRC/18/3 20. Hungary welcomed the timely submission by Belgium of its reports to treaty bodies. While asking for the implementation of the national action plan for children, it noted with satisfaction the constitutional provisions on children’s rights. Hungary referred to the importance of language diversity and was concerned that health workers remained unaware of legal provisions prohibiting female genital mutilation. Hungary made recommendations. 21. The Czech Republic appreciated the measures adopted by Belgium to enhance its legal and institutional mechanisms aimed at combating racial discrimination. However, it noted that de facto discrimination against persons belonging to ethnic and national minorities, in particular migrant workers and members of their families, still existed among some sectors of the population. The Czech Republic made recommendations. 22. Austria asked what additional measures had been adopted regarding reports of excessive use of force by the police. It also requested information on the Master Plan to improve conditions of detention and on the timeline for the adoption and implementation of the national action plan against domestic violence 2010–2014. Austria made recommendations. 23. France inquired on deadlines relating to the ratification of various international human rights instruments. It recalled that the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination noted that Belgian law did not provide for disbanding organizations inciting racial hatred. France mentioned the proposals made by a Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry in its report on sexual abuse against children in March 2011. France made recommendations. 24. Thailand commended Belgium for its commitment to promote and protect human rights for all, particularly the vulnerable groups. Thailand noted its efforts to strengthen its penal system and administration of justice. Thailand appreciated its active role in the humanitarian field and welcomed its action plan to combat trafficking in persons, in addition to its support to the activities of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Thailand made recommendations. 25. Estonia noted that Belgium was party to all main human rights instruments and fully cooperated with special procedures. It encouraged Belgium to continue efforts to combat domestic violence. Estonia asked for additional information on poverty reduction and inquired whether the situation of low-income groups had improved with the implementation of the Federal Poverty Reduction plan. It also asked about the process of the ratification of OPCAT. 26. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland referred to the positive contribution to the human rights situation of the establishment of a national human rights institution. It inquired as to how Belgium will address the situation of asylum-seekers who did not enjoy their right to housing and the child protection gaps in its legislation. It noted the absence of comprehensive legislation to protect women from domestic abuse and the resurgence of anti-Semitic and racist acts. The United Kingdom made recommendations. 27. Poland appreciated Belgium’s commitment to cooperation with the United Nations special procedures and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Poland welcomed numerous developments in the legal and institutional system. Poland, however, referred to the finding of the Committee on the Rights of the Child that there were still areas where further steps should be taken in order to ensure children’s rights. Poland made recommendations. 28. Slovenia asked for information on the implementation of the second phase of the World Programme for Human Rights Education. It also asked about followup to the recommendations of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to officially recognize the need to protect the cultural diversity of minorities and consider ratifying the GE.11-14583 5