A/HRC/18/3 Introduction 1. The Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), established in accordance with Human Rights Council resolution 5/1 of 18 June 2007, held its eleventh session from 2 to 13 May 2011. The review of Belgium was held at the 1st meeting on 2 May 2011. The delegation of Belgium was headed by Steven Vanackere, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs. At its 5th meeting, held on 4 May 2011, the Working Group adopted the report on Belgium. 2. On 21 June 2010, the Human Rights Council selected the following group of rapporteurs (troika) to facilitate the review of Belgium: Cuba, Japan and Nigeria. 3. In accordance with paragraph 15 of the annex to resolution 5/1, the following documents were issued for the review of Belgium: (a) A national report submitted/written presentation made in accordance with paragraph 15 (a) (A/HRC/WG.6/11/BEL/1); (b) A compilation prepared by OHCHR in accordance with paragraph 15 (b) (A/HRC/WG.6/11/BEL/2); (c) A summary prepared by OHCHR in accordance with paragraph 15 (c) (A/HRC/WG.6/11/BEL/3). 4. A list of questions prepared in advance by the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, the Netherlands, Norway, Slovenia, Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland was transmitted to Belgium through the troika. These questions are available on the extranet of the UPR. I. Summary of the proceedings of the review process A. Presentation by the State under review 5. In introducing the presentation, Steven Vanackere, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs, stressed the importance that Belgium attached to human rights and the universal periodic review. 6. Belgium was a federal State structured in such a way that responsibility for the full realization of human rights was shared among different levels of authority: the federal State, the Communities and the Regions. The fact that Belgium had three official languages enhanced its cultural wealth but sometimes posed practical problems. Those aspects of the national situation needed to be borne in mind in order to properly evaluate the action taken by the Belgian authorities in regard to human rights. 7. Belgium considered that, on balance, the outcome of its human rights efforts was positive. Fundamental rights were enshrined in the Constitution and upheld in practice. There was, of course, still room for improvement. 8. Belgium was already party to the main international human rights treaties, and it was on the way to ratifying several other treaties as well. 9. The creation of a national human rights institution in accordance with the Paris Principles was under consideration. GE.11-14583 3