A/HRC/28/81 D. National mechanisms 56. At the 10th meeting, Pedro Mouratian, President, National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism (INADI) in Argentina, briefed the Ad Hoc Committee on the work of his organization on the topic “Establishment, designation or maintaining of national mechanisms with competences to protect against and prevent all forms and manifestation of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance”. 57. For a summary of the presentation and the discussion with participants that followed, see annex I, section C. E. Xenophobia 58. The topic “Xenophobia” was discussed at the 11th meeting. A presentation was made by Ioannis Dimitrakopoulos, Head of the Equality and Citizens’ Rights Department, European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. 59. For a summary of the presentation and the discussion with participants which followed, see annex I, section D. F. General discussion and exchange of views, 12th meeting 60. The Ad Hoc Committee held a general discussion and exchange of views at its 12th meeting. 61. The representative of the European Union made some preliminary observations and was of the view that the reissued questionnaire had produced an outcome that was, in terms of substance, very similar to that of the first questionnaire. Some regions were well represented, including European countries, while representative information from some other regions was still lacking. The Ad Hoc Committee’s discussions confirmed that challenges remained. Many positive steps and best practices from various parts of the world were also highlighted. Situations varied and solutions addressing racism and related issues took different forms, depending on the country, hence there was no one-size-fit-for-all approach. Regarding the issue of complementary standards, the representative noted that, in the view of the European Union, the sixth session had confirmed the assessment that more needed to be done by States and stakeholders to implement and monitor the implementation of existing standards more vigorously. The Convention remained the key international instrument and the European Union regretted its lack of universal ratification. The European Union saw no evidence that the lack of international legal standards would prevent efforts to fight those phenomena. 62. The representative of the United States noted, in reference to the discussion during the 11th meeting, that immigration reform was a priority of its Administration, which had emphasized that there needed to be a pathway to citizenship for the 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States. With regard to the large numbers of unaccompanied children that had received much attention, the United States was working with neighbouring concerned Governments to address root causes of emigration and to inform about the risks of migration. 63. The representative of Brazil suggested that the Committee could start elaborating documents, such as plans of action or guidelines, to fill the interpretative gap that Ms. Petrova had mentioned in her presentation. The representative of Brazil said that 12