A/HRC/10/29 for parents of children affected by these measures, in particular for pregnant women and mothers, including when these are foreigners or aliens with an irregular administrative status. They shared concerns on allegations of xenophobic or discriminatory behaviour of prison personnel towards foreign detainees. They welcomed the recommendation that holding measures of persons awaiting expulsion be restricted to cases of risk to national security or threat to public order. The two organizations stated that the possibility of placing minors in detention was a regressive step and hoped that Luxembourg would respect its international obligations in the planning of the new detention centre. With regard to the lack of provisions in Luxembourg’s legislation guaranteeing the principle of non-refoulement, they regretted that the response of Luxembourg had not been followed by a commitment in this regard. They supported the recommendation that Luxembourg ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. (d) Concluding remarks of the State under review 353. In his concluding remarks, the Permanent Representative expressed thanks to all the speakers. Luxembourg attached considerable importance to the activities carried out by the various commissions and organizations and would take into account the comments made. Luxembourg would conduct the follow-up process in cooperation with civil society, and report regularly to the Council on the progress made in this regard. Regarding detention conditions, Luxembourg reaffirmed its stance taken during the review in December 2008 and explained in the national report. Regarding violence against women, measures had already been taken to address this issue in legislation and the national plan for 2009–2013. 354. The Representative stated that he took to heart the active participation by everyone in the universal periodic review and thanked the secretariat of OHCHR for its support, the members of the troika who had played a helpful part in the process, all Member States for their recommendations and civil society. The promotion and protection of human rights remained a continuing challenge for all States and the entire international community. Luxembourg was not above criticism and its endeavours to ensure the universal respect of human rights should not exempt it from the national efforts that it would expect of others. Luxembourg would continue its efforts to overcome difficulties where they existed, and, to that end, the review process had laid down an important road map to those goals. In cooperation with the international community and civil society, the Government of Luxembourg would tirelessly continue to ensure progress in a system that should always be ready to take on new challenges, and would continue to work towards improving human rights in the country. 5. Barbados 355. The review of Barbados was held on 3 December 2008 in conformity with all the relevant provisions contained in Council resolution 5/1, and was based on the national report submitted by Barbados in accordance with the annex to Council resolution 5/1, paragraph 15 (a) (A/HRC/WG.6/3/BRB/1); the compilation prepared by OHCHR in accordance with paragraph 15 (b) (A/HRC/WG.6/3/BRB/2); and the summary prepared by OHCHR in accordance with paragraph 15 (c) (A/HRC/WG.6/3/BRB/3). 356. At the 28th meeting, on 18 March 2009, the Council considered and adopted the outcome of the review on Barbados (see section C below). 357. The outcome of the review on Barbados comprises the report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review (A/HRC/10/73), the views of Barbados 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/10/73/Add.1). 142 GE.09-17451