A/HRC/17/3 Introduction 1. The Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), established in accordance with Human Rights Council resolution 5/1 of 18 June 2007, held its tenth session from 24 January to 4 February 2011. The review of Nauru was held at the 1st meeting, on 24 January 2011. The delegation of Nauru was headed by Mathew Batsiua, MP, Minister for Health, Justice and Sports. At its 5th meeting, held on 26 January 2011, the Working Group adopted the report on Nauru. 2. On 21 June 2010, the Human Rights Council selected the following group of rapporteurs (troika) to facilitate the review of Nauru: Hungary, Malaysia and Switzerland. 3. In accordance with paragraph 15 of the annex to resolution 5/1, the following documents were issued for the review of Nauru: (a) A national report submitted/written presentation made in accordance with paragraph 15 (a) (A/HRC/WG.6/10/NRU/1 and A/HRC/WG.6/10/NRU/1/Corr.1); (b) A compilation prepared by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) in accordance with paragraph 15 (b) (A/HRC/WG.6/10/NRU/2); (c) A summary prepared by OHCHR in accordance with paragraph 15 (c) (A/HRC/WG.6/10/NRU/3). 4. A list of questions prepared in advance by the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Latvia, Maldives, Slovenia, Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland was transmitted to Nauru through the troika. These questions are available on the extranet of the UPR. I. Summary of the proceedings of the review process A. Presentation by the State under review 5. Mr. Batsiua, MP, Minister for Health, Justice and Sports introduced the Nauruan delegation and acknowledged with gratitude the support of the Secretariat of the Pacific Community. The delegation of Nauru stated that Nauruan people had traditionally respected fundamental beliefs, which today were translated into international fundamental rights and freedoms. However, Nauru, the world’s smallest independent Republic, was not without its own issues and challenges. 6. The Constitution of Nauru was the source of its fundamental human rights principles. In 2004, the Government embarked upon a comprehensive review of the Constitution, which involved a very extensive public awareness and consultation campaign. It resulted in two draft laws, which received the unanimous support of the Parliament in 2009. The second of these Bills, upon being passed by Parliament, needed to be further endorsed through a referendum. However, in February 2010, voters rejected the proposed amendments, which would have significantly amended Part II of the Constitution, containing the bill of rights provisions. It would have notably protected the rights of disabled persons and environmental rights, prohibited the death penalty, guaranteed children’s rights, recognized the right to receive education and health, and enshrined the right to receive maternity leave and the right to access information. 7. Nauru mentioned that the failure of the referendum was currently under review and being analysed by a Standing Committee of Parliament known as the Constitutional Review Committee. The head of the delegation stated that he thought that the rejection of the 3