A/HRC/26/15 87. Somalia commended the progress identified in the national report. It noted that 74 of the 79 recommendations made during the first UPR cycle had been accepted, and that the implementation of many of those had begun. Somalia made recommendations. 88. Montenegro welcomed the ratification of CAT, and asked how it would be implemented, notably in cases of excessive use of force by law enforcement officials, especially in prisons. It requested details of the measures taken following the recommendations made by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. Noting decriminalization of abortion in some cases, it asked whether legislation would be amended in cases of rape, incest or fetal malformation. Montenegro made recommendations. 89. Mexico noted Criminal Code reform in areas such as domestic violence, slavery and racial segregation. It commended the establishment of the Constitutional Court and the Human Rights Unit in the Attorney General’s Office. It applauded the ratification of CAT and other efforts to combat torture, and urged cooperation with the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Mexico made recommendations. 90. Regarding the question raised by Liechtenstein and the Netherlands on the Kampala Amendments, the delegation reported that the amendments were under internal consultation, but that in the draft Penal Code under consideration by Congress, all grave crimes under the Rome Statute, including the crime of aggression, were established as criminal offences. 91. Regarding the question raised on LGBT community, the Dominican Republic reported that it guarantees their rights, in accordance to articles 8 and 39 of the Constitution regarding the right to equality for all. The draft Penal Code also included norms against discrimination, the Dominican Republic had co-sponsored the declaration aiming to fight discrimination based on sexual orientation and there were no restrictions on public activities such as the Caravan of Gay Pride. 92. Regarding the questions raised on the ruling of the Constitutional Court by several delegations, the delegation stated that in the Dominican Republic all persons, including foreigners, had access to the rights to health, education and work. The decision of the Constitutional Court did not affect any person who had been born in the Dominican Republic and issued with a valid birth certificate. Those who had been born in the Dominican Republic and who were registered on the Civil Register but had irregular documentation, as long as that documentation had not been obtained by fraudulent means, might benefit from a special law that would allow them to acquire Dominican nationality. Those who did not wish to apply under that law could appeal to the Court. 93. In its ruling, the Court stated that nobody could be deprived of documentation by an administrative process but that the procedure must be in line with the Court procedures. In a first survey of the Civil Register, there were 53,847 children of foreigners on the register, of whom 24,392 were registered irregularly. In order to deal with the cases of those children, the Government had proposed a special bill that would recognize those persons as citizens of the Dominican Republic, as they did not have links or roots in any other country. The President will bring the draft before Congress once the next regular legislative period started. 94. As a result of Constitutional Court ruling TC0168/13, no one had lost their nationality and no person had been affected. The ruling only determined that any person that had been proved to be irregularly registered, i.e., not in in compliance with the law in force at the time of their birth, would be individually subject to a nullification process before the competent courts, which would decide on the validity of his or her documents. 13