A/HRC/8/25 Page 14 47. The United Kingdom responded to questions on six themes. Firstly, it referred to a 2007 action plan on violence against women which brings together existing measures and plans to deliver key objectives on sexual violence, and to a further report that was presented this month, stating that it will continue to take this issue seriously. Second, regarding questions from Sweden and Algeria about counter-terrorism measures and proposals for pre-charge detention, the United Kingdom stressed that such measures are proportionate, with built-in parliamentary and judicial safeguards, and that a judge can authorize continued detention only if he/she is satisfied that it is necessary and the investigation is being carried out diligently and expeditiously. Third, regarding a question from the Republic of Korea on the issue of the British Indian Ocean Territory and the rights of the Ilois, as asked by the Republic of Korea, the United Kingdom stated that it does not consider article 2(2) of ICCPR relevant to this territory or that a separate report is required. There is no permanent population and the Ilois had been granted right of abode in the United Kingdom. Fourth, with regard to questions about section 19(d) of the Race Relations (Amendment) Act, the United Kingdom considered that this enables immigration officers to subject certain nationals to extra scrutiny, rather than discrimination – these nationalities are the ones that present the greatest risk of a breach of immigration laws. The list of such nationalities is updated on a monthly basis and is approved by a Minister, and the United Kingdom does not discriminate on the basis of colour or race. Fifth, the United Kingdom noted, in response to Azerbaijan, that since in the United Kingdom system, international treaties are not incorporated immediately into domestic law, it will not ratify a treaty unless it is satisfied that domestic law enables it to comply with such treaty or until the necessary changes to domestic law have been approved through the parliamentary process. Sixth, with regard to New Zealand’s question about the Equality and Human Rights Commission, the United Kingdom indicated that it was an important institutional innovation and would be a major contributor to several areas of human rights protection. 48. Egypt stressed that the protection provided by international human rights law continues in situations of armed conflict, as reaffirmed by the International Court of Justice, and figures among the basis of UPR as contained in the Human Rights Council institution-building text adopted and accepted by all members of the Council. In this regard, Egypt noted that it would have been expected that the national report of the United Kingdom include more information on the steps taken to ensure that the United Kingdom armed forces, where present and taking part in an armed conflict, do not violate the relevant basic human rights norms, in addition to respecting international humanitarian law. In this regard, Egypt recommended that the United Kingdom elaborate specific policies and programmes aimed at ensuring that its applicable human rights obligations are not violated in situation of armed conflict. Noting that the report indicates that tackling real and perceived socio-economic inequalities is a priority of the United Kingdom, Egypt recommended that it enhance the programmes aimed at addressing these inequalities from a human rights perspective, in fulfilment of its obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Egypt also recommended that the United Kingdom accede to ICRMW. Furthermore, Egypt expressed its willingness to learn more about the 2006 Act on Racial and Religious Hatred, in particular the extent to which the threshold set therein is compatible with article 20, paragraph 2, of ICCPR. In the same vein, Egypt recommended that the United Kingdom withdraw its interpretative statement on article 4 of ICERD. Finally, Egypt recommended that the example of the United Kingdom in issuing, in principle, a specific law dealing with incitement to racial and religious hatred, be emulated as a good practice in countries which have not done so, in implementation of article 20(2) of ICCPR and its stipulated purpose. 49. Norway asked, while noting and appreciating the United Kingdom’s strong engagement for human rights defenders around the world, whether the delegation could elaborate on the steps taken to implement the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.