A/HRC/21/15 approval were lengthy, due to the large scope of the Convention. The draft act would be submitted before the summer 2012. The question on signing and ratifying its Optional Protocol was thus premature. 41. The Netherlands remarked that the provision of article 26 of CRC would not grant to children an independent right to social security. Children benefited from social security through their parents. Therefore, the Netherlands maintained its reservation to article 26. The Netherlands had further considered that issue; however, it had concluded that the same arguments still applied. 42. The Netherlands would not accede to the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (ICRMW), on the ground of its national policy regarding social provision. The Netherlands objected to the section which set out that provisions should be equally accessibly to migrant who were not lawfully present within the territory of the country of their destination and/or were unlawfully employed. While their stay was unlawful, such person paid neither taxes nor the contributions used to fund these services. They should not have equal social and economic rights. Exceptions were made for the education of children who were of compulsory school age and acute medical emergencies, and legal assistance. 43. Regarding non-discrimination, its ban was enshrined in article 1 of the Constitution. The Netherlands was highly committed to combating discrimination and racism. It rejected any form of discrimination, be it on the grounds of race, descent, religion, belief, gender, sexual orientation, handicap or any other ground. Discrimination was at odds with citizenship and impeded them from taking part in their community. The Minister stated that the Government of the Netherlands did not pursue specific policies targeting specific types of discrimination. She referred to bodies to prevent and combat discrimination, like the anti-discrimination bureaus, the Equal Treatment Commission and the police, which were accessible to everyone. In addition, in 2010, a National Action Plan to Combat Discrimination had been enacted. In 2011, further measures had been put in place to combat discrimination, including school programmes. 44. The Netherlands also had a very comprehensive legal framework to combat the incitement to hatred and was party to all relevant international instruments. Regarding the question posed about the author of the film Fitna, Ms. Spies reported that the member of the House of Representatives had been acquitted by the Criminal Court of the charges of public insults and incitement to hatred. The Prosecutor decided not to lodge an appeal. Dutch society was characterized by freedom of speech for politicians. These liberties were established in the Constitution and human rights instruments. However, the police and the judiciary acted against statements that were incompatible with legal provisions regarding freedom from discrimination. 45. Hate crimes on the Internet were investigated and prosecuted by the police specialized in cybercrime. Several cases had been brought before criminal courts resulting in convictions. Ms. Spies also referred to the Dutch Complaint Bureau for Discrimination on the Internet, which had the function of alerting and preventing discrimination, and contributed to criminal law enforcement. 46. Regarding preventative searches, the delegation stated that two studies had been completed and recommendations made to develop further criteria, guidelines and practices to avoid discrimination. The Ombudsman in the Netherlands had also investigated the manner in which the preventive searches were applied and made recommendations. 47. Ms. Spies also referred to the municipal antidiscrimination services which strengthened the anti-discrimination infrastructure and were mandated to carry out statutory tasks and provide assistance in dealing with discrimination complaints. She highlighted the 8