A/HRC/15/11 39. The Czech Republic acknowledged the system of ombudsmen ready to assist in cases of discrimination. It acknowledged Sweden’s systematic work and exemplary cooperation with international mechanisms. The Czech Republic made recommendations. 40. While welcoming the adoption of the second National Action Plan for Human Rights, Romania was interested in learning about its implementation. Romania also noted that there was no independent national human rights institution and asked for updated information in that regard. 41. Finland welcomed the new legislation on minorities and minority languages and asked about how access for minorities to social services could be improved, and how the Delegation for Roma Issues was carrying out its functions. Finland also asked about the benefits of having merged four distinct entities into the Equality Ombudsman. Finland made recommendations. 42. Egypt noted the adoption of Sweden’s second National Action Plan for Human Rights, with its main focus on discrimination, and the new Anti-Discrimination Act. However, Egypt echoed the concerns expressed by treaty bodies regarding the increase in racially motivated crimes and the low number of prosecutions. Egypt also inquired about measures taken to combat the trafficking in women and children. Egypt made recommendations. 43. Cuba expressed concerns about racial hatred crimes, the dissemination of racist propaganda, religious intolerance, the reluctance to prosecute cases of discrimination against minorities, and the excessive use of force against migrants. It was also concerned about discrimination against Sami and Roma children and about the situation of people with disabilities. It regretted the impunity of State agents responsible for the use of Swedish territory as transit territory for secret flights of the Central Intelligence Agency. Cuba made recommendations. 44. Spain highlighted Sweden’s willingness to cooperate with special procedures and its effort to integrate a human rights perspective into its policies. It recognized Sweden’s achievements regarding the integration of migrants. It asked how the national mechanism for follow-up to the implementation of CRPD would work. Spain made recommendations. 45. New Zealand welcomed the new Act on national minorities and minority languages. However, it noted that the land issues of the Sami people had not been resolved and asked questions in that regard. It was concerned about the use of diplomatic assurances and about challenges faced by persons with disabilities. It regretted that Sweden had yet to establish an independent national human rights institution. New Zealand made recommendations. 46. Mexico acknowledged Sweden’s improvements in its human rights normative framework and the institution of the Ombudsman. It noted with satisfaction efforts to ensure the right to health and education for every child, and the information provided regarding the fighting of trafficking. Mexico made recommendations. 47. Bolivia (Plurinational State of) expressed concern about participation by the Sami in political decisions affecting them, especially regarding land issues. It noted that Sweden supported the United Nations Declaration on Indigenous Peoples but had not implemented the rights set out therein and had not ratified ILO Convention No. 169. It asked whether Sweden intended to expropriate indigenous lands to install windmills. It expressed concern about the increase in crimes motivated by racial hate, the propaganda in favour of white supremacy, and the lack of penalties for such crimes. Bolivia made recommendations. 48. Chile commended Sweden for having taken in thousands of Chileans during turbulent times in Chilean history. It praised the ratification of many human rights treaties and the human rights normative framework. It welcomed the adoption of a national plan to combat violence against women and the priority given to combating violence against 7