A/HRC/8/25 Page 4 country in preparing for the review and had engaged with them in a frank and constructive discussion. 7. The United Kingdom’s review comes at a time of new information about the past use of British territory for extraordinary renditions, about treatment of detainees in Iraq, and debate about how long terrorist suspects can be held properly without charge. It is engaged in a continuing discussion with national human rights institutions, NGOs, academics and members of the public about how best to uphold human rights while at the same time countering threats to public safety and national security. The State is proud of its record on human rights and its achievement in bringing rights home through the incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in domestic legislation in the form of the Human Rights Act. Reconciling the demands of liberty and human rights and security was one of the United Kingdom’s greatest challenges. The United Kingdom sees promotion of respect for human rights for everyone as vital in tackling the roots of terrorism. 8. Referring to questions posed by Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden about its plans to extend pretrial detention, the use of control orders and the policy of deportation of terrorist suspects, the United Kingdom noted that its position on all of these issues was that terrorism undermines fundamental human rights - including the right to life. The Government had a responsibility to take action to reduce the threat to the public whilst respecting the fundamental rights of every individual. Prosecution remained the preferred approach in dealing with suspected terrorists but the Government recognized that any changes to enable more prosecutions to be brought had to be accompanied by balancing safeguards for human rights. The State noted that an extension from the current 28 days pretrial detention to 42 days where there is a clear and exceptional need had been proposed to Parliament. At present, all detention beyond 48 hours must be authorized by a judge and the person concerned can make representation to the judge and can be legally represented. Continued detention is agreed only if the detention is still judged to be necessary and the investigation is being carried out diligently and expeditiously. 9. The United Kingdom informed the meeting that where suspected terrorists cannot be prosecuted or deported, the Government considers control orders which impose restrictions on the movement and activities of terrorist suspects to be the best available solution. All control orders were subject to mandatory review by the High Court, and in October 2007 the House of Lords found Control Order legislation to be fully compliant with ECHR. Where concerns are raised about the safety of terrorist suspects deported to their home country, the Government believes that diplomatic assurances are a valid way of achieving deportation in accordance with the United Kingdom’s international obligations, including those relating to the absolute prohibition of torture. These assurances represent a serious commitment by all the parties concerned, and all deportations using assurances attracted extensive rights of appeal in the United Kingdom. The Government ensures that monitoring arrangements are in place in the countries with which it has made such agreements. Referring to the question put forward by Netherlands on how the United Kingdom policy would change in the light of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Saadi case, it noted that there was nothing in the judgment that would affect the Government’s current policy of seeking assurances where it considers that to be necessary. The Government had always accepted that diplomatic assurances had to be examined to establish whether they were a sufficient guarantee of protection, as the European Court of Human Rights had said. 10. Referring to questions from Denmark, Finland, France, Italy and Sweden about the United Kingdom’s policies with regard to children’s rights, the United Kingdom believed that no child should be subjected to violence or abuse, and noted that the law had been tightened in a number of areas to give greater protection to children, notably the criminal law. The criminal law had been