A/HRC/17/2 extending invitations to them in due course on a case-by-case basis. Nepal was of the view that preparation was important to make these visits productive and meaningful. 307. The delegation briefly explained why Nepal was not able to accept some of the recommendations contained in paragraph 109 of the report of the Working Group. With regard to the ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture, the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the Protocol thereto, the delegation stated that, as a party to almost all core human rights treaties, Nepal regularly reviewed human rights treaties for possible accession or ratification. Nepal believed that putting in place adequate national infrastructures was a prerequisite for complying with the principles and objectives of the treaties, and undertaking additional responsibilities, including the reporting obligations that emanated from them. Even without being a party to these instruments, Nepal had consistently upheld their principles and objectives. 308. With regard to the recommendation contained in paragraph 109.8, Nepal reiterated that it had no policy of forcibly returning refugees. 309. With regard to the recommendation to promote durable solutions other than resettlement in third countries for refugees in eastern Nepal (para. 109.9), Nepal did not have a policy of local integration of refugees as a durable solution. 310. Regarding the recommendation to amend legislation to remove all provisions granting security forces or Government officials’ immunity from prosecution for criminal acts (para. 109.11), the existing laws in Nepal did not have any provision of immunity from prosecution. 311. With regard to the recommendation to address cases of statelessness under the new Constitution (para. 109.12), the delegation categorically refuted the existence of cases of statelessness in Nepal. The delegation further indicated that a new Constitution was the prerogative of the sovereign Constituent Assembly. 312. As Nepal was striving to finalize the peace process and the drafting of the new Constitution, the protection and promotion of human rights remained a core concern. The delegation made an appeal to the international community for its continued goodwill, support and cooperation to make Nepal a peaceful, stable, democratic and prosperous country. 2. Views expressed by Member and observer States of the Human Rights Council on the review outcome 313. Algeria noted Nepal’s clear response to the remaining 36 recommendations and welcomed the large number of recommendations accepted. It took note with interest of Nepal’s institutional reforms and of the decision to prolong the mandate of the Constitutional Assembly, which would consolidate the peace process. It encouraged the international community to continue to provide constructive support to the country. 314. Sri Lanka welcomed Nepal’s comprehensive participation in the universal periodic review, incorporating inter-agency and interministerial dialogue involving cross-sectoral and regional representation. It commended the process of discussing achievements, identifying constraints and challenges and the sharing of best practices. It appreciated the socioeconomic and political transformation taking place in Nepal and the interim Constitution of 2007. It noted that the Constitutional Assembly had increased representation of women and Nepal’s sociocultural diversity. It welcomed the fact that Nepal had considered 56 recommendations positively. 315. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland referred to reports according to which the Government had sought the withdrawal of conflict-era criminal 130 GE.12-13630