A/HRC/15/11 59. A bill had been submitted to Parliament proposing an amendment to the Constitution to give explicit recognition to the Sami. Sami policy promoted self-determination on issues directly affecting them. The Sami Parliament had been given new responsibilities regarding reindeer herding, and in 2006 the Government had submitted a bill on increasing Sami independence. 60. Sweden condemned all incitement to violence or hatred, and provisions concerning hate crimes were stipulated under law. Sweden firmly condemned Islamophobia and antiSemitism and was committed to combating all forms of racism and intolerance. Threats and harassment against religious congregations were addressed by law enforcement authorities. In Sweden, it was the Chancellor of Justice that handled cases concerning incitement to racial hatred. 61. Freedom of expression was a priority. Nonetheless, it had limitations in international law. Swedish law regulated those limitations, including through the prohibition of agitation against a national or ethnic group. Websites were protected from censorship and prohibitive measures. Notwithstanding, there were mechanisms for prosecuting violators of the right to freedom of expression, employed by the competent public agencies; the Government was constitutionally prohibited from intervening in particular cases. 62. Ensuring children’s rights was also a priority. Sweden was one of the largest contributors to UNICEF and had a clear policy on implementing children’s rights, based on CRC. Those efforts also covered asylum-seeking children and provisions regarding health care, education and the fight against poverty among children. 63. The migration and asylum policy was based on the full realization of human rights. The policy guaranteed long-term sustainability, safeguarded the right to asylum, facilitated cross-border mobility, promoted needs-based labour immigration, supported the positive impact of migration and expanded international cooperation. Measures were being taken to combat the disappearance of unaccompanied asylum-seeking children. 64. Through its implementation of the provisions of the six core human rights instruments, Sweden had already fulfilled most of the principles set out in ICRMW. Migrant workers already enjoyed equal rights with citizens. 65. Sweden had ratified ICRPD and CRPD-OP in 2008. Sweden ensured that its legislation was in line with the Convention. With regard to CED, Sweden had signed it in 2007 and was considering ratification. 66. Sweden noted that it had strict regulations requiring that arms not be exported to countries in armed conflict in which there was a risk of violating humanitarian law. 67. Concerning the Signals Intelligence Act, Sweden noted that there was a legitimate interest in having an efficient tool for collecting intelligence from foreign counties, balanced with the protection of personal integrity and the right to privacy. A special intelligence court had been established to examine requests for carrying out signals intelligence, and a special inspectorate had been established to verify compliance with the Act. Furthermore, the Data Protection Board monitored the agency carrying out such activities. Sweden stressed that its primary interest was in creating a clear legal basis for such activities, which was in conformity with its human rights obligations. 68. Sweden noted that it was not its regular practice to use diplomatic assurances when expelling aliens who had been refused asylum or residence permits. Diplomatic assurances had been used in two cases in 2001, which had been heavily criticised by the Human Rights Committee and the Committee against Torture, and such assurances had not been used since. 9