A/HRC/43/2 3. General comments made by other stakeholders 729. During the adoption of the outcome of the review of Madagascar, four other stakeholders made statements.** 730. The Center for Global Nonkilling stated that it was with deep sadness that its organization acknowledged the choice of Madagascar to note the recommendations made towards the ratification of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. It was asserted that the prevention of genocide was a matter pertaining to the dignity of humanity and to its capacity to give a true and lively meaning to its universal and common history. It reiterated its call for the universal ratification of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, and called upon all States that have not yet done so to discharge local considerations regarding the ratification of the Convention, and to join all the other nations in its universal efforts towards making genocide a crime of the past. It also called upon Madagascar to reconsider its position and ratify the Convention, without further delay. It stated that the progress of humanity, for both present and future generations, was in the hands of the present generation. 731. CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation welcomed the acceptance by Madagascar of 22 recommendations focusing on civic space. However, its submission to the universal periodic review had documented that, since the last review, Madagascar had only partially implemented two recommendations and had not taken concrete steps to implement another 20 recommendations made in 2014, that also related to civic space. It welcomed the acquittal of investigative journalist Fernand Cello by the Fianarantsoa Appeals Court nearly two years after his arrest on charges with the theft of a chequebook. This acquittal was a necessary step to respect the rights of journalists and media houses. However, concerns remained over the media code that imposed heavy fines for offenses such as contempt, defamation, and insults against government officials. In addition, flaws in the criminal justice system allowed the judiciary to rule under the influence of the executive. Pre-trial detention, including of human rights defenders and journalists, was prevalent and used as a strategy to force them to self-censor. It asserted that freedom of assembly also continued to be restricted as authorities used public order as a justification to ban protests by civil society groups. It expressed concerns regarding the high levels of prosecution, intimidation and harassment of human rights defenders, particularly those advocating for environmental and land rights. It called upon the Government of Madagascar to take proactive measures to address these concerns and implement recommendations to create and maintain, in law and in practice, an enabling environment for civil society. 732. United Nations Watch expressed concerns about persistent corruption in Madagascar that undermined all other improvements in the promotion of human rights and democracy. It noted that, according to the report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review, Madagascar reaffirmed its fight against corruption, and its commitment to promoting integrity, accountability and transparency. However, it stated that, according to the latest Corruption Perception Index by Transparency International, Madagascar placed near the bottom, ranking 158 out of 180 countries, and a 2017 report by the International Monetary Fund had found that corruption in Madagascar led to reduced macroeconomic and political stability, while Freedom House had noted that investigation and prosecutions of corruption by the underfunded Anticorruption Bureau of Madagascar were infrequent and rarely targeted high ranking officials. It recalled the zero tolerance stance on corruption announced by the President of Madagascar in February 2020 and highlighted that, within the proposed 2020 fiscal budget, there were reportedly 196 million euros budgeted with no specified ** The statements of stakeholders that were unable to deliver them owing to time constraints which were made available are posted on the extranet of the Human Rights Council, at https://extranet.ohchr.org/sites/hrc/HRCSessions/RegularSessions/43session/Pages/default.aspx GE. 115