A/HRC/17/2 (c) The summary prepared by OHCHR in accordance with paragraph 15 (c) (A/HRC/WG.6/10/EST/3). 640. At its 17th meeting, on 4 February 2011, the Human Rights Council considered and adopted the outcome of the review of Estonia (see section C below). 641. The outcome of the review of Estonia comprised the report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review (A/HRC/17/17), the views of Estonia concerning the recommendations and/or conclusions, and its voluntary commitments and replies presented before the adoption of the outcome by the plenary to questions or issues that were not sufficiently addressed during the interactive dialogue in the Working Group (see also A/HRC/17/17/Add.1). 1. Views expressed by the State under review on the recommendations and/or conclusions, its voluntary commitments and the outcome 642. The delegation of Estonia appreciated the contributions of many States to ensure the constructive interactive dialogue in the Working Group, which had made it possible for Estonia to receive recognition for the steps taken to further promote and protect human rights and to identify areas that required further improvement. The report of the Working Group had been disseminated among ministries, civil society organizations and other national stakeholders, and relevant actors were consulted with regard to the implementation of the recommendations made during the review. 643. Of 124 recommendations, Estonia supported 88, of which 8 had already been implemented, 1 was in the process of implementation, while 20 had been rejected. Furthermore, 16 recommendations were left for Estonia’s further consideration after the session of the Working Group. 644. After thorough consideration, Estonia had accepted 6 recommendations of the 16 recommendations pending. Estonia had accepted the recommendation to sign and ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and had already initiated the preparation for accession to the Convention. Estonia had also accepted the recommendation to ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and had initiated an analysis of domestic legislation for that purpose. 645. In addition, the recommendations that were accepted after the session of the Working Group were on expediting action to establish a gender equality council; increasing the resources allocated to the Commissioner for Gender Equality and Equal Treatment; paying special attention to acts of violence against homosexuals; and speeding up the process of the adoption of the Development Plan for Children and Families for 2011–2020. 646. With regard to its position on the recommendations pending Estonia’s decision after the session of the Working Group, the delegation had provided further comments in addition to the written pronouncement submitted by Estonia. In this respect, the delegation reported that, while Estonia was committed to ratifying the Convention of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2011, it was not in a position to give a definitive answer on the recommendation to sign and ratify the Optional Protocol to that Convention. 647. The delegation regretted the fact that, at the current stage, Estonia was not in a position to give a definitive response to the recommendation to recognize the competence of the Committee against Torture or the relevant analysis was still under way. Similarly, Estonia could not provide a definitive answer to the recommendation on obtaining accreditation for a national human rights institution from the International Coordinating Committee. Although no institution was currently accredited, the institution of the Chancellor of Justice had already played this role by acting as national preventive 180 GE.12-13630