A/HRC/8/25 Page 8 It also noted that the preferred approach of the United Kingdom to deal with the terrorist threat is through prosecution, by removal from the country as well as policies that tackle socio-economic inequalities. Malaysia asked whether, aside from this range of options, the United Kingdom considers addressing the root causes of the threat equally important. 23. Pakistan noted that the United Kingdom has made impressive advances in national laws. It agreed with the United Kingdom that violent extremists, claiming to speak and act in the name of Islam, have their own political agenda, and that the United Kingdom has rightly made distinction between extremism and their faith. Pakistan also recognized the work of the United Kingdom with Islamic communities in the country, as well as its partnerships and international cooperation with developing countries in the context of the Millennium Development Goals. With regard to the Human Rights Act 1998, it asked why the public perception varies from the intended objectives. It also asked how the new Terrorism Act will address the issue of judicial oversight. Furthermore, it asked how the United Kingdom is balancing the pursuit of terrorists and human rights. 24. Mexico noted that all countries in the world, regardless of level of development and without exception, confront challenges concerning human rights. With regard to the counter-terrorism efforts, Mexico noted the references made by the United Kingdom in its report that human rights is an indispensable part of counter-terrorism efforts, and that “being strong on counter-terrorism does not mean being weak on human rights”. It requested comments on the two matters identified by the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture as referred to in paragraph 37 of the compilation report prepared by OHCHR. 25. The United Kingdom expressed thanks for the preceding comments and the care taken in reading its submission to the review. It would answer as many questions as possible, and reply in writing to any that were not addressed. It noted that there may have been a misunderstanding of its position on counter-terrorism and human rights. Cuba had seemed to suggest that the United Kingdom was saying that any act taken by the State was legitimate dealing with terrorism. The United Kingdom noted it has never said that, and does not agree with that. The Government must take necessary steps to protect people but must respect fundamental human rights that are enjoyed by everybody. Regarding the question of the Syrian Arab Republic on why the need to update counter-terrorism legislation, the United Kingdom noted that new powers were needed to deal with the new and developing threat, about which more is learned month by month. The powers introduced attract extensive legal review by the courts. Only in very limited circumstances is secret evidence used to justify the detention of suspected terrorists. All the measures should be proportionate, and are not directed towards any particular race, religion or group but are aimed at criminals and terrorists, whatever their background or section of society they may come from. On implementing the Human Rights Act, as asked by Belgium and Pakistan, the United Kingdom noted that the Act has not been welcomed by parts of the media, and that this is often due to a profound misunderstanding of what human rights consist of. The Government is addressing the myths, and people are starting to see the value of the Act in their everyday lives. Regarding Sri Lanka’s question about the Bloody Sunday inquiries, the United Kingdom informed the meeting that the evidence of over 900 witnesses explained the length of the process. Although Lord Saville has advised that he is unable to give a time scale for issuing the report, the United Kingdom Government regards it as very important that these voices are heard. In response to the question from Slovenia regarding detention of children, the United Kingdom stated that unaccompanied children are not normally detained. The only two exceptions are if the child is part of a family group and detention is deemed necessary, or wholly exceptionally for the protection of an isolated child, and then normally only over one night, until alternative facilities are found. It reminded the meeting that all detainees can challenge the lawfulness of their detention, including through judicial review and habeas corpus. Regarding questions on the punishment of children, the United Kingdom keeps