A/HRC/23/10 16. With regard to the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, there were significant legal obstacles related to the remit of the European Union in the area of migrant workers. The Council of the European Union was competent to issue rules governing immigration and the protection of the rights of persons from third countries, including conditions for residence. 17. With regard to the third Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the relevant legislative procedure could start in 2013 and the vote in the parliament and depositing of the instruments could take place in late 2013 or early 2014. 18. As for the protection of the human rights of asylum seekers and non-refoulement, Luxembourg had ratified the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and applied the principle of non-refoulement established in article 33. In addition, the country’s law on the right to asylum and other forms of protection in fact provided that applicants for international protection were obliged to remain in the country. The law provided for exceptions so that, in compliance with international obligations, applicants could be sent or extradited to another member State of the European Union, a third country or an international criminal court or tribunal. 19. With regard to bills concerning the amendment of the legal age for marriage, the abolition of the waiting period for remarriage in the event of divorce or widowhood and same-sex marriage, the Council of State had just issued its opinions and the texts were being discussed in the Legal Affairs Commission of the Chamber of Deputies. 20. The national report focused on the difficulties mentioned and criticism expressed by international expert bodies and civil society. 21. With regard to freedom of religion or belief, a report by a group of experts on the development of relations between the State and cultural or philosophical communities had been published on 4 October 2012. Interested parties had been invited to submit their contributions to stimulate a major public debate in the coming weeks. The parties concerned included regulated and unregulated cultural communities as well as lay, secularist, humanist, agnostic and philosophical associations. 22. In the past, issues had been raised regarding the conditions in which foreigners could be detained at closed facilities when they were subject to removal orders or decisions denying them entry to the country. Various measures had been taken to remedy that situation. Firstly, the main aim was clearly to encourage voluntary return before anyone was placed in detention. A detention centre had become operational in September 2011. Since it had opened, only 444 persons had been placed there, whereas 2,078 persons had returned voluntarily to their countries of origin in 2011 and 2012. On average, the 444 persons held at the centre since September 2011 had been detained for 28 days, but the legislation governing the detention centre stipulated that families with children could not be kept at the centre for more than 72 hours. Only 17 persons — 3.9 per cent — had been detained at the centre for 4 months or more. 23. House arrest had been introduced as an alternative to detention in 2011. 24. Another issue was the situation of undocumented residents who were employed in Luxembourg. In that regard, an exceptional, one-off measure had been taken to regularize their situation. Undocumented citizens of third countries residing in Luxembourg could in certain circumstances obtain residence permits as employed workers. The measure in question had been adopted along with changes to the law governing the free movement of persons and immigration. 25. With regard to cooperation with the United Nations, Luxembourg was currently doing everything possible to ratify the legal instruments it had signed. Accordingly, since the previous review it had ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities GE.13-12572 5