A/HRC/17/4 69. Australia commended Rwanda for its progress in literacy, reducing gender gaps in enrolments, and reducing maternal and child mortality. It commended Rwanda for its efforts in increasing the participation of women in Parliament, and for preventing the spread of HIV/AIDS. Australia praised the abolition of the death penalty, but raised concern about the Genocide Ideology Law and the role of the gacaca courts in the judicial system. Australia made recommendations. 70. Cuba highlighted Rwanda’s progress in human rights promotion, and referred to the measures taken to counteract international exploitation, which was the main cause of the underdevelopment of Rwandans. It referred to Rwanda’s main challenges: high demographic growth and the lack of resources to tackle extreme poverty. Cuba congratulated Rwanda for moving towards the achievement of most of the MDGs before 2015. Cuba highlighted the Vision 2020 plan as well as several sectoral policies, and made recommendations. 71. Sweden welcomed the efforts and developments made in a number of areas, including in the social and economic fields. It referred to information that human rights work remained controlled and that journalists were closely monitored by the authorities. It asked Rwanda to expand on the actions that have been taken to promote and protect the right to freedom of expression, press and association. Sweden noted that although the legislation provided for safeguards against arbitrary arrest and detention, security forces reportedly arrested and detained persons arbitrarily and without due process. It made recommendations. 72. The delegation stated that Rwanda would examine in detail the recommendations and issues raised by the Member States, some of which have already been addressed. It expressed regret that some of the issues raised were based on inaccurate information: human trafficking, recruitment of children into armed groups, imprisonment in solitary confinement were not issues in Rwanda. Regarding the latter, the delegation explained that the confusion arose because Rwanda had put in place special prisons for the transfer of detainees from the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. In 2008, a review was carried out and the terminology in use is “room of sufficient size and facilities”. 73. Regarding the gacaca courts, the delegation explained that the mechanism had dealt with millions of files in a short period of time, and had reconciled people and brought them into the community. Regarding women’s rights, Rwanda emphasized that one of its priorities was the promotion of gender equality. Laws have been amended to provide equal opportunities for men and women, and children’s rights have been promoted. 74. The delegation explained that the National Commission for Human Rights was an independent institution based on the Paris Principles, and its members represented the different sectors of society. Regarding the budget of the Commission, Rwanda indicated that the State provided 1.6 million dollars each year, and that the Commission also received funds from various donors. 75. The delegation also explained the joint governance assessment process, by which the Government, along with development partners, regularly identifies progress made, as well as the challenges and obstacles ahead, and formulates recommendations. The mechanism has clear principles and indicators and a clear framework, and concentrates on evidencebased assessment. Civil society organizations and the private sector also participate in the process. Rwanda emphasizes a consensual model of participatory democracy. Participation in public policymaking has been institutionalized through the Governance Advisory Council. Rwanda has already begun implementing various recommendations, including a public-policy dialogue on the Media Law. The access to information bill is another example of this inclusive dialogue. 12