A/HRC/10/29 (a) Views expressed by the State under review on the recommendations and/or conclusions as well as on its voluntary commitments and on the outcome 328. The Permanent Representative of Luxembourg to the United Nations Office at Geneva stated that it was a privilege for Luxembourg to be one of the first 48 countries to go through the universal periodic review process. Luxembourg supported the idea of this innovative mechanism, during the negotiations that resulted in the creation of the Council, because it sought greater discipline and efficiency in the United Nations system for the protection of human rights. 329. The Permanent Representative gave a summary of Luxembourg’s responses to the recommendations addressed in the course of the interactive dialogue on 2 December 2008. He stated that a more comprehensive response to the recommendations had been provided in writing and was available as an addendum to the report of the working group (A/HRC/10/72/Add.1). 330. With regard to Luxembourg’s international obligations, the country had committed itself to take into account recommendations and to complete the various processes of ratification as soon as possible. However, in the case of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, there were major legal obstacles because of European Community competence in migrant worker issues, which did not allow the completion of the ratification of the Convention at this stage. Luxembourg expressed its hope that a study could be carried out in the European Union to determine possible ways and means of finding a solution with the view to the ratification of the Convention. Like other European Union partners, Luxembourg will continue to participate actively in the international community reflection on the issue of migrants. 331. The universal periodic review was a dynamic process of consultation of independent institutions monitoring compliance of human rights in Luxembourg. This consultation process also involved civil society organizations engaged in the promotion and protection of human rights. It was a beneficial exercise for the country. Luxembourg pledged to continue this consultation on a regular basis in order to ensure an appropriate follow-up to the review report and outcome. 332. Luxembourg was aware of the challenges in human rights of persons with mental disabilities. The country was about to conduct legislative reform to strengthen the fundamental rights of persons interned for psychiatric treatment without their consent. A law modifying the current regime for persons with mental disabilities was to be adopted very soon. The law would amend and update the current provisions to take into account the most recent international recommendations made on this issue, and would make the involuntary placement of persons with mental disturbances the subject of a court decision, which could be appealed at any moment of the procedure. The use of involuntary treatment and isolation detention measures would be used in very specific circumstances and as a last resort. On child psychiatry, Luxembourg had pledged to increase the number and quality of its infrastructures for the therapeutic treatment of children with behaviour or mental disturbances. These efforts would be continued to guarantee high-quality child psychiatry reflecting the latest developments in medicine. 333. Regarding the recommendation to develop legislation on immigration and international protection in keeping with the principle of non-refoulement, Luxembourg believed that its new legislation was in compliance with the principle of non-refoulement both in terms of immigration legislation and also on the rights of asylum. Concerning the recommendation to halt the practice of freeing minors at borders, this practice did not exist in Luxembourg. With regard to the recommendation on detention measures, Luxembourg would soon transpose the return directives of the European Union into its national 138 GE.09-17451