A/HRC/16/2 participated actively in the interactive dialogue and was willing to maintain cooperation with all interested countries, civil society organizations and human rights mechanisms. In this regard, Croatia would soon be reviewed by three United Nations treaty bodies. Croatia stated that it was crucial to maintain interdependence and constant interaction between the universal periodic review and the treaty body system in order to improve both mechanisms. 614. Croatia was pleased to inform the Human Rights Council that it had accepted the great majority of proposed recommendations, among them 94 in November 2010. Croatia was unable to accept only two recommendations: the recommendation concerning the access to citizenship, as it was incompatible with domestic legislation since it had set requirements going beyond the international standards; and the recommendation on free legal aid, which remained open to interpretation owing to its drafting. 615. Croatia partially accepted several recommendations, namely those concerning ratification of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families and the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. On the former instrument, Croatia was of the view that an effective system for migrants’ rights should be seen as an integral part of the wider European human rights framework. While Croatia had not yet reached a final decision on whether to sign or ratify the Convention, the broad legislative framework for migrant protection had already been enacted. Regarding the latter instrument, the interagency working group was in the process of formulating recommendations with regard to its signature and possible ratification. 616. All other postponed recommendations were accepted without any objection. Croatia had provided basic information to clarify its responses on various issues, namely national minorities, return of refugees, war crimes, anti-discrimination, persons with disabilities and human trafficking. Croatia had decided to accept the recommendation that it establish an adequate mechanism for the follow-up to universal periodic review recommendations, which would include the participation and cooperation of all relevant stakeholders. 617. Croatia expressed its commitment to make all recommendations more visible and to the comprehensive universal periodic review exercise, although it could certainly be improved. 618. Lastly, Croatia clarified its position relating to recommendations 98.1 to 98.3 on the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families. Croatia had not accepted these recommendations and recalled what it had said earlier on this specific instrument. 2. Views expressed by Member and observer States of the Human Rights Council on the review outcome 619. Algeria noted with appreciation the large number of recommendations that Croatia considered it had already implemented or was in the process of implementing. It welcomed the fact that two of its three recommendations had enjoyed the support of Croatia, and took note of what Croatia had stated about follow-up to its third recommendation on the possibility of acceding to the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, in accordance with recommendation 1737 of 17 March 2006, adopted by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, of which Croatia was a member. 620. Morocco noted with interest the efforts made by Croatia, in particular in the framework of the three-year national programme to strengthen the promotion and protection of human rights. It welcomed Croatia’s efforts to enhance the implementation of the normative and institutional framework, strengthen administrative and institutional capacities and combat discrimination. Morocco was satisfied that two of its GE.11-17059 193