21/15 Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review - Netherlands

GE.12-15077

Human Rights Council Twenty-first session

Agenda item 6 Universal Periodic Review

Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review*

Netherlands

* The annex to the present report is circulated as received.

Contents Paragraphs Page

Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1–4 3

I. Summary of the proceedings of the review process ................................................ 5–97 3

A. Presentation by the State under review ........................................................... 5–19 3

B. Interactive dialogue and responses by the State under review ........................ 20–97 5

II. Conclusions and/or recommendations ..................................................................... 98 14

Annex

Composition of the delegation ......................................................................................................... 23

Introduction

1. The Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review, established in accordance with Human Rights Council resolution 5/1 of 18 June 2007, held its thirteenth session from 21 May to 4 June 2012. The review of the Netherlands was held at the 15th meeting on 31 May 2012. The delegation of the Netherlands was headed by Liesbeth Spies, Minister of Interior and Kingdom Relations. At its 18th meeting held on 4 June 2012, the Working Group adopted the report on the Netherlands.

2. On 3 May 2012, the Human Rights Council selected the following group of rapporteurs (troika) to facilitate the review of the Netherlands: Benin, the Russian Federation and Thailand.

3. In accordance with paragraph 15 of the annex to resolution 5/1 and paragraph 5 of the annex to Council resolution 16/21 of 25 March 2011, the following documents were issued for the review of the Netherlands:

(a) A national report submitted and a written presentation made in accordance with paragraph 15 (a) (A/HRC/WG.6/13/NLD/1);

(b) A compilation prepared by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) in accordance with paragraph 15 (b) (A/HRC/WG.6/13/NLD/2);

(c) A summary prepared by OHCHR in accordance with paragraph 15 (c) (A/HRC/WG.6/13/NLD/3 and Corr.1).

4. A list of questions prepared in advance by Norway, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Slovenia and Sweden was transmitted to the Netherlands through the troika. These questions are available on the extranet of the universal periodic review (UPR).

I. Summary of the proceedings of the review process

A. Presentation by the State under review

5. Firstly, the national report of the Netherlands was introduced by the Minister of the Interior and Kingdom Relations of the Netherlands, Liesbeth Spies, who reported that it was the first time that all four countries of the Kingdom had been represented, namely Aruba, Curaçao, Sint Maarten and the Netherlands. Ms. Spies noted the great importance that the Netherlands attached to promoting, protecting and upholding human rights, as demonstrated by the Dutch candidature to the Human Rights Council for the 2015–2017 term. She also highlighted the new developments since the last UPR, such as the establishment of the National Human Rights Institute in accordance with the principles relating to the status of national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights (Paris Principles) and the establishment, in 2011, of the Children’s Ombudsman.

6. Ms. Spies emphasized the important role that numerous organizations, beside the Government, Parliament and judiciary, played in supervising observance of human rights. The expertise of academics and representatives of human rights organizations was often requested in order to establish a constructive dialogue. UPR was a notable example of that dialogue.

7. In addition, Ms. Spies explained that, in April 2012, the Coalition Government of the Netherlands had resigned. Therefore, the current Government, although officially not in

function, would continue its work on the implementation of the main policy measures to endorse full respect of human rights, inter alia: guaranteeing the equality of every citizen, promoting integration, fighting domestic violence by punishing perpetrators and protecting victims, combating the trafficking of human beings, protecting refugees and asylum seekers, promoting social acceptance of LGBT people in society and human rights education in the Dutch school.

8. According to Ms. Spies, regularly policy measures or legislation did limit human rights, e.g. in the interest of public safety of for the prevention of disorder or crime. That was inevitable and sometimes even required by human rights in the case of positive obligations. In the view of the delegation, the need to strike a balance between different interests had sometimes been extensively debated in the Dutch political arena, as it had been in the context of privacy measures and draft legislation limiting privacy. The compatibility of that legislation with the human right standards was of outmost importance. It required a thorough scrutiny test, which was guaranteed by the Dutch professionals and institutions. Improvements in that regard had been made, especially in the starting phase of new draft legislation. It had been done in the field of privacy, where establishing privacy impact assessments describing the modalities for the planned processing of personal data was compulsory nowadays.

9. Ms. Spies also stressed that the Netherlands was strongly committed to the UPR process, having voluntarily submitted a mid-term review in 2010 and constructively contributing to UPR sessions of other Member States. She emphasized that the Netherlands would take the recommendations put forward during the second UPR cycle very seriously and ensure serious and transparent follow up to the recommendations and willingness to answer all questions.

10. Secondly, a representative from Aruba referred to the new Ordinance on Compulsory Education, which would guarantee access to the education system to all children, irrespective of their legal status, to illustrate that efforts had been made to harmonize legislation with the human rights instruments. Reference was also made to the new juvenile justice system in the new Criminal Code, which provided the court with a wider range of sanctions, including placement in a juvenile detention centre and training orders, to make the transition back into society as smooth as possible and offer them a better chance for the future.

11. Thirdly, a representative from Curaçao stated that the universal rights and fundamental freedoms are duly respected and protected in Curaçao. It mentioned that Curaçao would establish a human rights institute, spearheaded by the Treaty Section of the Directorate of Foreign Relations. Furthermore the representative stressed the political participation of women.

12. Ms. Spies thanked the delegations of Sweden, Slovenia and the United Kingdom for their advanced written questions. In relation to the questions related to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), she proudly announced that the Government of the Netherlands was preparing for approval and the draft act for ratification would be submitted during the course of 2012.

13. Concerning the question related to the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OP-CAT), Ms. Spies explained that the Netherlands did not limit the scope of application to people deprived of liberty solely on the basis of criminal law; the ground of deprivation was irrelevant.

14. The delegation noted that the Government of the Netherlands gave high priority to combating discrimination, and an anti-discrimination action plan had been sent to the House of Representatives in 2010 and in 2011.

15. In relation to identity theft and data protection, Ms. Spies stated that the Netherlands was currently working on a legislative proposal on data breach notification. The proposal would require those responsible for personal data to notify the data protection authorities in case of “leakage” of personal data with specific risks for privacy, including identity theft. The initiative was expected to be tabled in the second half of 2012.

16. Ms. Spies responded to the question on freedom of religion reporting that a bill on the ban of ritual slaughter had been initialized by the Parliament. That bill was still pending in Senate, and no majority was expected. Concerning the bill on face-covering garments, the Government was of the opinion that the bill would indeed limit the freedom of religion or belief; however, there were reasons for the bill in line with the limitation clauses of the freedom of religion or belief, which was not an absolute right.

17. In response to the remarks on the importance of facts and figures in the debate on migration, Ms. Spies referred to the so-called Dutch Migration Chart, containing factual analyses, useable in the public debate on migration.

18. The Minister informed that the Government of the Netherlands had recently made some progress on the issue of prostitution. Regulation and monitoring of that sector was reasonably successful. A law proposition was currently under way, with the primary goals being to reduce the local and regional disparities, get more insight into the escort sector and further facilitate regulation and monitoring.

19. Finally, concerning the question about the lessons learnt from the non-governmental organization (NGO) consultations in the process of the preparations for UPR, Ms. Spies emphasized the importance and relevance of the consultation process as such, and the relevance of being in dialogue. The Netherlands had learned about the concerns expressed by many NGOs regarding the human rights situation in the Netherlands, which had helped the Netherlands to get a better understanding of their concerns and the focus of the concerned NGOs. That had helped the Government in the drafting of its report. Ms. Spies expressed the hope that NGOs and institutions were also fed by the platform offered by the Netherlands and that she had the impression that was rightly the case.

B. Interactive dialogue and responses by the State under review

20. During the interactive dialogue, 49 delegations made statements. Recommendations made during the dialogue are to be found in section II of the present report.

21. Egypt noted the Dutch decision to establish a national human rights institution. It expressed concern about the legalization of prostitution, the existence of child sex tourism, rights of migrants and national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, racism and xenophobia from, among others, extreme political parties. It requested information on the promotion of tolerance and non-discrimination. Egypt made recommendations.

22. Estonia congratulated the Netherlands on the inclusion of civil society and other stakeholders in the preparation of its UPR report. Estonia commended the creation of a Children’s Ombudsman, the country’s policies on LGBT rights, the protection of privacy and individual data and its role as a driver in the Internet freedom agenda. Estonia encouraged the Netherlands to continue its combat on incitement against minority groups. Estonia made recommendations.

23. France welcomed the ratification by the Netherlands of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances (CPED) and OP-CAT. It commended the establishment of a national human rights institution and the Children’s Ombudsman, requesting information on mechanisms envisaged to align the Dutch Antilles with these two initiatives. It noted concern over persistent discrimination of women,

particularly migrant women, and the propagation over Internet of racist and anti-Semitic views. France made recommendations.

24. Germany commended the country’s implementation of a significant number of recommendations from the first UPR, its combat against human trafficking, particularly through the renewal of the mandate of the Task Force on Human Trafficking and approval of its 2011–2014 action plan. Germany welcomed the drafting of an action plan to combat child abuse. Germany asked about the parliamentary process to ratify CRPD, and when the National Institute for Human Rights would be operational.

25. Greece noted with satisfaction the Dutch efforts to promote women’s rights but expressed concern that women still earned less than men and requested information on measures to combat that issue. Greece also requested information on the functioning of detention centres vis-à-vis the treatment of migrants in line with the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT). Greece made recommendations.

26. Guatemala expressed concern about administrative and criminal measures used in the Netherlands that could place migrants in situations of vulnerability, such as limited access for undocumented migrants to basic services, and that illegal residence was described in the Penal Code as an offence, which penalized migrants seeking to improve their conditions of existence. Guatemala noted with interest the establishment of Municipal Anti-Discrimination Services requesting further information on the implementation, functioning and development of those services. Guatemala made a recommendation.

27. Poland congratulated the Netherlands on the significant developments achieved in its human rights infrastructure. Poland made recommendations.

28. India welcomed the country’s establishment of a national human rights institution (NHRI). India expressed concern about the increase in reports of racial discrimination, xenophobia and ethnic profiling and encouraged the Netherlands to intensify efforts to combat discrimination. India highlighted the Dutch efforts to address violence against women, and noted its position as premier donor State to OHCHR funds. India made recommendations.

29. Indonesia congratulated the country’s establishment of a national human rights institution in accordance with the Paris Principles. It welcomed the renewal of the Task Force on Human Trafficking mandate but expressed concern about the levels of discrimination and xenophobia in the Netherlands, particularly anti-Muslim speeches made by political and public figures and the media. Indonesia made recommendations.

30. The Islamic Republic of Iran expressed concern on human rights violations, cited in the OHCHR report, by the Government of the Netherlands, particularly racial and religious discrimination, discrimination against Muslims, migrants, asylum seekers, people of African descent and other minority groups. The Islamic Republic of Iran made recommendations.

31. Malaysia observed with concern the incidence of racist and xenophobic speeches, particularly against Muslims, made by the media, influential political and public figures, as well as racism directed at ethnic minorities during election campaigns. Malaysia asked if any measures had been taken to address this issue. It also referred with concern to observations of discrimination toward ethnic minorities made by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. Malaysia made recommendations.

32. Mexico noted with satisfaction measures taken by the Netherlands to guarantee the rights of asylum seekers, such as the replacement of the 48-hour accelerated procedure. Mexico welcomed the establishment of an NHRI in accordance with the Paris Principles, the Children’s Ombudsman and the introduction of Municipal Anti-Discrimination

Services, as well as the progress and good practice achieved in Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten. Mexico made recommendations.

33. Morocco applauded the establishment of a national human rights institution, the Children’s Ombudsman and the Municipal Anti-Discrimination Services. It requested further information on particularly the impact of the “Eigen Kracht” programme, the success experience of Aruba in the combat against human trafficking and measures taken by the Netherlands to ensure the respect of privacy through the secure use of personal data. Morocco made recommendations.

34. Mozambique commended the Netherlands on its many initiatives undertaken to promote human rights, particularly efforts to reduce human trafficking and the establishment of an NHRI in accordance with the Paris Principles. Mozambique welcomed the ratification of the CPED, the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OP-CAT) and Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict (OP-CRC-AC) and was encouraged by the announcement of pending approval of CRPD and its Optional Protocol. Mozambique urged the Netherlands to consider withdrawing its reservations to the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).

35. Despite existing anti-discrimination measures, Nicaragua noted the continuation of discrimination of ethnic minorities in the Netherlands mainly due to the lack of a comprehensive plan of action targeting that social problem. As a result, those affected, particularly migrant women and minority groups, were prevented from enjoying social, economic and cultural rights. Nicaragua made recommendations.

36. Norway welcomed the establishment of an NHRI and Children’s Ombudsman. Norway requested information on the views of the Netherlands on the suggestion by civil society to formalize human rights education in order to increase awareness. Norway made recommendations.

37. Pakistan commented on the adverse effects of individual freedoms practised in the Netherlands, stating that absolute freedom could impinge the rights and freedoms of others through insult, incitation of hatred and discrimination. It referred to concerns vis-à-vis racist and xenophobic speeches made by extreme Dutch political parties and expressed regret at the Dutch decision not to appeal the verdict of the Geert Wilders case. Pakistan asked the Netherlands how it intended to stop Wilders’ campaign of Islamophobia. Pakistan made recommendations.

38. Paraguay welcomed the establishment of an NHRI in accordance with the Paris Principles and the creation of a Children’s Ombudsman, expressing its hope that those institutions could fully undertake activities to investigate, provide information about the human rights situation and cooperate systematically with civil society, as well as with national, European and other institutions engaged in the protection of human rights. Paraguay voiced concern over migrants’ human rights, particularly reports that migrants

were exposed to marginalization. Paraguay made recommendations.

39. The Philippines welcomed the establishment of the Children’s Ombudsman but noted an apparent absence of a consolidated national action plan for human rights in the countries that comprised the Kingdom of Netherlands. The Philippines appreciated the frank assessment presented by the Netherlands regarding challenges in the implementation of the right to privacy, particularly the protection of personal data. The Philippines made recommendations.

40. Ms. Spies expressed appreciation for the interventions noting the progress made in the Kingdom of the Netherlands. She reiterated that the Netherlands was currently evaluating the consequences of the ratification of CRPD. The preparations before the

approval were lengthy, due to the large scope of the Convention. The draft act would be submitted before the summer 2012. The question on signing and ratifying its Optional Protocol was thus premature.

41. The Netherlands remarked that the provision of article 26 of CRC would not grant to children an independent right to social security. Children benefited from social security through their parents. Therefore, the Netherlands maintained its reservation to article 26. The Netherlands had further considered that issue; however, it had concluded that the same arguments still applied.

42. The Netherlands would not accede to the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (ICRMW), on the ground of its national policy regarding social provision. The Netherlands objected to the section which set out that provisions should be equally accessibly to migrant who were not lawfully present within the territory of the country of their destination and/or were unlawfully employed. While their stay was unlawful, such person paid neither taxes nor the contributions used to fund these services. They should not have equal social and economic rights. Exceptions were made for the education of children who were of compulsory school age and acute medical emergencies, and legal assistance.

43. Regarding non-discrimination, its ban was enshrined in article 1 of the Constitution. The Netherlands was highly committed to combating discrimination and racism. It rejected any form of discrimination, be it on the grounds of race, descent, religion, belief, gender, sexual orientation, handicap or any other ground. Discrimination was at odds with citizenship and impeded them from taking part in their community. The Minister stated that the Government of the Netherlands did not pursue specific policies targeting specific types of discrimination. She referred to bodies to prevent and combat discrimination, like the anti-discrimination bureaus, the Equal Treatment Commission and the police, which were accessible to everyone. In addition, in 2010, a National Action Plan to Combat Discrimination had been enacted. In 2011, further measures had been put in place to combat discrimination, including school programmes.

44. The Netherlands also had a very comprehensive legal framework to combat the incitement to hatred and was party to all relevant international instruments. Regarding the question posed about the author of the film Fitna, Ms. Spies reported that the member of the House of Representatives had been acquitted by the Criminal Court of the charges of public insults and incitement to hatred. The Prosecutor decided not to lodge an appeal. Dutch society was characterized by freedom of speech for politicians. These liberties were established in the Constitution and human rights instruments. However, the police and the judiciary acted against statements that were incompatible with legal provisions regarding freedom from discrimination.

45. Hate crimes on the Internet were investigated and prosecuted by the police specialized in cybercrime. Several cases had been brought before criminal courts resulting in convictions. Ms. Spies also referred to the Dutch Complaint Bureau for Discrimination on the Internet, which had the function of alerting and preventing discrimination, and contributed to criminal law enforcement.

46. Regarding preventative searches, the delegation stated that two studies had been completed and recommendations made to develop further criteria, guidelines and practices to avoid discrimination. The Ombudsman in the Netherlands had also investigated the manner in which the preventive searches were applied and made recommendations.

47. Ms. Spies also referred to the municipal antidiscrimination services which strengthened the anti-discrimination infrastructure and were mandated to carry out statutory tasks and provide assistance in dealing with discrimination complaints. She highlighted the

fact that the Netherlands was the first country in Europe that regulated municipal anti- discrimination policy by law.

48. The Netherlands were in favour of improving regulation on ethnic data using personal data. Rules and procedures in that regard had been issued. The Netherlands endorsed the need for adopting clear legislation to address the issue.

49. The representative of Curaçao stated that it was an autonomous country of the Kingdom of the Netherlands and reiterated the decision of Curaçao to establish a human rights institution.

50. Hungary praised the substantial financial contribution by the Netherlands to OHCHR, the establishment of a national human rights institution in accordance with the Paris Principles, the appointment of a Children’s Ombudsman and the enactment of the

Municipal Anti-Discrimination Act. It requested information on the effects and benefits of that Act. Hungary also requested clarification on the Netherlands’ plan to address discriminatory statements by public institutions. Hungary made recommendations.

51. Qatar congratulated the Netherlands on achievements made at legislative and institutional levels since the first UPR. Qatar welcomed the establishment of the Children’s Ombudsman, an NHRI in accordance with the Paris Principles, accession to many international conventions on human rights, and measures taken to combat human trafficking. Qatar made recommendations.

52. Romania congratulated the Netherlands on its presentation of a mid-term progress report in 2010. It welcomed the establishment of an information system to monitor developments on a regular basis in, among others, discrimination. Romania made a recommendation.

53. The Russian Federation expressed concern that the NHRI was not accessible to inhabitants of the overseas territories where many suffered from low standards of living and ill-developed health system. The Russian Federation voiced concern over the increase of xenophobic and racist views, the discriminatory situation of religious, national and ethnic minorities, women, the persons with disabilities and migrants, the situation in the judiciary and prison systems, the stiffening of immigration policy and the conditions in which asylum seekers were kept. It regretted the decision to maintain reservations to CRC. The Russian Federation made recommendations.

54. Slovakia welcomed in particular the establishment of a national human rights institution in accordance with the Paris Principles, the Children’s Ombudsman and the

introduction of the Municipal Anti-Discrimination Services. It also commended the ratification by the Netherlands of CED and OP-CRC-AC and progress towards ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (OP- CRPD). Slovakia commended the new “Children Safe” action plan to address child abuse. Slovakia made recommendations.

55. Slovenia commended the Netherlands for its high level of respect for human rights. Nevertheless, it was concerned that the number of child abuse cases was not decreasing, that corporal punishment was not prohibited in Aruba and that insufficient progress had been made in combating structural inequality. Slovenia made recommendations.

56. Spain congratulated the Netherlands for its integration and assistance policies to immigrants over the last few years. Spain made recommendations.

57. Sweden commended the establishment of an ombudsman for children, and welcomed the ratification of OPCAT and welcomed the clarification regarding the criteria for applying OPCAT, which was applicable regardless of the grounds of detention. It also

noted with satisfaction that national plans to combat discrimination had been put forward in the last years. Sweden made a recommendation.

58. Thailand asked the Dutch delegation if there was a plan to set up appropriate institutions for the protection of human rights of the citizens of its overseas territories and, if not, what existing mechanism could be used to provide appropriate redress for violation of human rights of these people. Thailand made recommendations.

59. Turkey was concerned by the measures implemented to restrict the rights of migrants living in the Netherlands. Turkey welcomed the abolition of the precondition of passing the Dutch language before admittance in the country, but noted that Turkish mother tongue teaching was no longer offered during primary education since 2004. Furthermore, Turkey referred to the case of the Turkish singer, Arif Sag, who was allegedly interrogated unfairly for hours before being admitted into the country. Turkey made recommendations.

60. Ukraine commended progress achieved in implementing recommendations received in 2008. Furthermore, it encouraged the Government of the Netherlands to take further measures to combat disadvantages experienced by women in the labour market. Ukraine made a recommendation.

61. The United Kingdom asked if the Dutch Government would take further action to ensure that all asylum claimants received a timely hearing, that all citizens had ready access to the legal system, and that migrants and ethnic minorities received equal treatment in the workplace. It made recommendations.

62. The United States of America remained concerned about the enforcement of laws designed to counteract societal animosity toward racial and religious minorities, the turning down of the majority of asylum requests made by children outside the country who wanted to join their parents, vulnerability of women in the labour market and number of child abuses. It made recommendations.

63. Uruguay welcomed the establishment of the National Institute for Human Rights, the Children’s Ombudsman and Municipal Anti-Discrimination Services. However, it was concerned over sex tourism involving children, in which Dutch nationals were participating. Uruguay noted racist speeches from political parties and manifestations of intolerance against ethnic minorities. Uruguay made recommendations.

64. Uzbekistan was concerned about ongoing forms of discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin and information on increasingly broad use by the police of racist profiling. It also expressed concern over rejections by the State regarding proposals about discrimination policies and suggestions to combat Islamophobia. Uzbekistan made recommendations.

65. Viet Nam noted results made in education, social welfare, gender equality and establishment of new human rights mechanisms, as well as challenges such as racial discrimination, child abuse and violence against women and migrant women remained. Viet Nam made recommendations.

66. Algeria asked about the measures planned to step up efforts to combat the diffusion of racist ideas over Internet and other media. It also would wish measures to be taken regarding the low participation of women in public life, pay gap between men and women, underrepresentation of women in the labour market and their concentration in part-time work. Algeria made recommendations.

67. Argentina congratulated the Netherlands for the creation of the National Institute for Human Rights, the Children’s Ombudsman, and the ratification of CPED. Argentina made recommendations.

68. Australia noted that Curaçao and Sint Maarten’s new status as independent countries in the Kingdom brought human rights challenges, including that of establishing their own national human rights institutions. While welcoming the establishment of the Children’s Ombudsman, it recognized the challenge of implementing human rights education; such education helped safeguards the rights of the next generation. Australia made recommendations.

69. According to Ms. Spies, all people need to be proactive and involved to live in a society with harmony. Integration was important to both migrants and the society at large. An essential knowledge of Dutch language was an essential condition for participation. Poor languages skills, low level of education and unfamiliarity with Dutch institutions posed a risk for equal opportunities.

70. In relation to court fees, Ms. Spies stated that a Parliament decision in that regard was expected.

71. The delegation referred to the asylum procedure adopted in 2010, which was an improvement and benefited vulnerable groups. It did not result in all asylum claims being settled within eight days. Under that procedure, more time was given to legal and medical assistance. Detention was a measure of last resort and alternatives were available for families with under-age children. The Government of the Netherlands was experimenting with other alternatives to migrant detention, which would be evaluated next year. She further mentioned that a report was sent to the Parliament announcing decriminalization of irregular adult migrants. A decision of Parliament was expected. She added that migrant children had access to education, accommodation and necessary medical treatment. The best interest of children in procedures related to migration was taken into account, and their right to family life was also protected. Ms. Spies indicated that long-term residents without a permit were undesirable and the Netherlands was seeking to prevent long procedures which would not necessarily result in the issuance of resident permits.

72. Ms. Spies further mentioned that minorities, including women belonging to minorities, were encouraged to take part of the public life. To that end, they were also encouraged to take Dutch-language courses. The Netherlands was working on a more flexible dialogue with minorities.

73. Ms. Spies also indicated that lessons in Turkish were a choice of the parents, and there was an adequate supply of Turkish lessons and culture.

74. In connection with juvenile justice, the Netherlands reported that it would maintain its reservations to CRC. Juveniles would continue to be tried under regular criminal law, since it was an important means of preventing any necessity to introduce disproportional heavier sentences. However, children were protected under regular criminal law. They had the right to legal aid regardless the nature of the crime. Alternatives to depravation of liberty also existed.

75. In addition, Ms. Spies referred to the plan “Children Save” aimed to combat abuse and which included prevention using a multidisciplinary approach. The Netherlands would report on the implementation of that plan. She also mentioned that there was legislation in place to combat sex abuse in the context of tourism, with extraterritorial jurisdiction.

76. The representative of Aruba indicated that task forces had been established to protect the victims of trafficking and sexual exploitation, and provide assistance, such as free legal aid and health care. They had produced positive results. If victims were in Aruba illegally, they were not detained but treated as victims. Return to their country was also facilitated, or assistance to adapt in the society, if necessary.

77. The representative stated that corporal punishment was prohibited by law in schools in Aruba and legislation to extend the prohibition to the family setting was expected in

2012. Regarding the remarks on the issue of a human rights institution, Aruba would be working together with Curaçao and the Netherlands in creating a similar type of institution on the island to guarantee information, education and protection of human rights in their community.

78. The representative of Curaçao stated that corporal punishment was prohibited by law in Curaçao. She also referred to an amendment of the Civil Code which defined parents’ role as caretakers and educators and explicitly stated that parents were not allowed to employ either emotional nor physical violence or any other form of humiliating treatment against children.

79. Curaçao was a party to six major human rights instruments and its Constitution covered all the rights. However, the situation on the ground was not fully in conformity with the treaties. The National Human Rights Institution must work towards that and was not only expected to promote and protect human rights, but also to play an important role in human rights education. Curaçao was conscious of its shortcomings in respect to human rights institutions, law and policies. A seminar of experts was being prepared for June 2012, which would be used to design the national human rights policy.

80. Azerbaijan asked about the efforts undertaken by the Government of the Netherlands to establish national human rights institutions compliant with the Paris Principles. Azerbaijan remained concerned about the persistence of gender-role stereotypes, in particular about migrant women and men. Furthermore, Azerbaijan welcomed the introduction of compulsory education and measures to give all children access to school and reduce dropout rates. Azerbaijan made recommendations.

81. While understanding the importance of integration of migrants into the society of a destination country, Bangladesh emphasized the importance of ensuring the social and cultural rights of migrants equally. Regarding fundamental freedoms, it asked about instances where the Criminal Code had been applied to restrict freedom of expression to uphold freedom of others. Bangladesh made recommendations.

82. Belarus appealed the Netherlands to step up its interaction with the special procedures. Belarus mentioned reports that migrants and ethnic minorities were subjected to various forms of discrimination. Belarus underlined concerns of the Committee on the Rights of the Child over the scale of child sex tourism with participation of Dutch citizens, and the lack of appropriate reaction to this phenomenon. Belarus made recommendations.

83. Botswana commended the ratification of the OP-CAT, OP-CRC-AC and CPED as a follow-up to the first-cycle UPR. While welcoming the constitutional and institutional reforms taken, including the 2010 referendum granting Curaçao and Sint Maarten the autonomy as States, and the establishment of the Children’s Ombudsman in 2011, Botswana asked how the Dutch Government intended to address that the fact that the administrative apparatus of Curaçao had not yet established. Botswana made a recommendation.

84. Brazil welcomed the progress made concerning LGBT rights, especially promoting the safety of LGBT persons, and also commended the Netherlands for its measures regarding women’s rights. Furthermore, Brazil asked the Dutch delegation about statistics on the number of asylum seekers who had effectively been granted refugee status in the country in the last five years. Brazil made recommendations.

85. Canada asked for information on when the Netherlands plans to ratify CRPD and OP-CRPD. Canada made a recommendation.

86. With regards to achievements and best practices, Chile stressed the establishment of the National Institution for Human Rights, Children’s Ombudsman and Municipal Anti-

Discrimination Services, institutions which would help consolidate achievements and carry out new activities in relevant areas. Chile made recommendations.

87. China appreciated the efforts of the Government of the Netherlands to protect the rights of vulnerable groups. However, it noted with concern that phenomena of racism, xenophobia and religious intolerance still existed and that there were hate speeches against Muslims on the Internet. It also underlined that women and minorities were still discriminated against. China made recommendations.

88. Costa Rica welcomed the establishment of the National Human Rights Institution and the Children’s Ombudsman and the abolition of death penalty in Curaçao. It asked how the Dutch authorities monitored, regulated and prevented incitement to hatred speech on the Internet and how the best interest of the child was taken into account in cases of migration expulsion. Costa Rica made recommendations.

89. Cuba was concerned about the proliferation of incidents related to racism and xenophobia, particularly with the use of Internet and other media. It noted that violence against women was growing and cases of child abuse had not decreased. In that regard, necessary services must be more effective in reaching victims. Cuba also underlined reports on very difficult conditions of detention and mistreatment by the police. Cuba made recommendations.

90. Despite progress made in fighting discrimination and racism, Ecuador was concerned over complaints of mistreatment by police against irregular migrants and policies which criminalized migration. It asked about measures taken to reduce the number of migrants under detention, especially families with children and non-accompanied children, and what were the alternatives to detention for migrants, their use and results if any. Ecuador made recommendations.

91. The Representative of Curaçao referred to the development of the administrative apparatus of Curaçao and its implications in the implementation of human rights recommendations. Curaçao was an autonomous country of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, and was fully responsible for its internal affairs, including the organization and development of its public service. She added that Curaçao benefited from collaborating with its partners of the Netherlands.

92. Regarding the abolishment of life imprisonment of children, the delegation mentioned that, child imprisonment had not been practised for many years and, in 2008, had been removed from the Dutch Penal Code.

93. Ms. Spies indicated that the discussion of ratification of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (OP-CESCR) would continue after the elections in September 2012. Regarding the recommendations to enhance the participation of women in public functions, she stated that one of the main activities of the last years has been to raise more awareness and provide tools for the public sector. She added that there were only small disparities between men’s and women’s pay, which were explained by the fact that almost 70 per cent of the women worked part-time. The Netherlands had carried out extra promotional activities and would also support the combination work and provide more opportunities for women, such as flexible working hours. In addition, the Cabinet would continue developing community schools that offered full working day-care schemes. Moreover, a number of programmes would be developed to empower women at every level and all sectors of the economy.

94. According to Ms. Spies, many ethnic minorities in the Netherlands did not possess a good working knowledge of Dutch. Therefore, they had less chances of finding good opportunities on labour market. The low level of education of migrants had the consequence that they occupied more temporary positions than others. School dropout, in

particular, worsened that situation. The Netherlands was making an effort to promote school participation. The sensitivity of different sectors of economic crisis had provoked increasing of unemployment in specific sectors, such as the construction sector.

95. The Netherlands was also taking more action against human trafficking. In 2009, penalties for trafficking in human beings had increased. Early in 2012, a legislative proposal to increase the penalties in that regard had been send to Parliament. A national prosecutor and 90 prosecutors specialized in human trafficking had been appointed. Almost all police forces had supervision teams at their disposal and one of the main achievements was the establishment of close supervision by local authorities in the prostitution sector.

96. Ms. Spies reported that, since 2002, a policy to combat domestic violence had been implemented. The evaluation made in 2011 showed achievements. Domestic violence had been placed on the agenda of public administration. The Prosecutor’s Office had given instructions for that crime to be investigated and the maximum penalty therefor had been increased.

97. In her closing remarks, Ms. Spies indicated that the Netherlands would further study the different recommendations and questions and report on them before September 2012. She reaffirmed the position that every country had room for improvement when it came to human rights. The Netherlands and the other countries of the Kingdom were not excluded therefrom. The upholding of human rights should never be considered as self-evident.

II. Conclusions and/or recommendations**

98. The following recommendations will be examined by the Netherlands which will provide responses in due time, but no later than the twenty-second session of the

Human Rights Council in September 2012:

98.1. Ratify the ICRMW (Algeria, Egypt, Iran (Islamic Republic of));

98.2. Consider ratifying the ICRMW (Mexico);

98.3. Study the possibility of ratifying the ICRMW and continue with its efforts to achieve the ratification of the CRPD (Argentina);

98.4. Consider ratifying the ICRMW as well as the ILO Convention 189 (Belarus);

98.5. Proceed swiftly with the ratification of the CRPD and its Optional Protocol (Estonia);

98.6. Ratify the CRPD and its Optional Protocol (France, Australia);

98.7. Consider ratifying the OP-CRPD (Morocco);

98.8. Ratify the OP-CRPD (Iran (Islamic Republic of));

98.9. Ratify the CRPD and its Optional Protocol, as well as the OP-CESCR (Spain);

98.10. Adopt the necessary measures with a view to ratifying the CRPD and its Optional Protocol (Chile);

98.11. Study the possibility of ratifying the CRPD (Costa Rica);

98.12. Withdraw its reservations to the CRC (Iran (Islamic Republic of));

** Conclusions and recommendations have not been edited.

98.13. Reconsider the possibility of lifting reservations to the CRC (Russian Federation);

98.14. Lift its reservations to articles 26 (c), 37 and 40 of the CRC (Uzbekistan);

98.15. Ratify the OP-ICESCR (Slovakia);

98.16. Consider an early ratification of the third Optional Protocol to the CRC on a communication procedure (Slovakia);

98.17. Approve, in all the countries that form the Kingdom, legislation that criminalizes all forms of trafficking in persons (Nicaragua);

98.18. Prohibit corporal punishment in all settings through the Kingdom of the Netherlands (Slovenia);

98.19. Undertake necessary steps in order to harmonize the Dutch law and practice with the European Convention on the Legal Status of

Migrant Workers (Turkey);

98.20. Abolish in its criminal legislation the use of life imprisonment to children (Belarus);

98.21. Ensure effectiveness, proper functioning and independence of its national human rights institution (Egypt);

98.22. Accelerate the full operationalization of the National Institute for Human Rights in the near future (Indonesia);

98.23. Expedite the establishment and operationalization of the National Institute for Human Rights which fully complies with the Paris

Principles (Malaysia);

98.24. Make full use in practice of the new Institute for Human Rights to promote a coherent approach to human rights issues across the

spectrum of different policy areas and human rights situations

(Norway);

98.25. Work with all sectors including the education sector, to ensure the National Human Rights Institute effectively supports the country’s

commitment to human rights (Australia);

98.26. Continue to assist, when requested, Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten to develop human rights institutions, laws and policies

(Australia);

98.27. Formulate a national human rights action plan (Philippines);

98.28. Develop a national human rights action plan (Uzbekistan);

98.29. Evaluate the possibility to develop a national human rights action plan (Argentina);

98.30. Draft a national human rights plan which includes public policies and strategies reaching a comprehensive range of human rights (Brazil);

98.31. Keep the Human Rights Council informed about the follow-up to the “Talent to the Top” charter and inform it of the results obtained by

signatories (Morocco);

98.32. Continue efforts aimed at promoting and protecting human rights on the ground (Qatar);

98.33. Adopt a National Action Plan on Human Rights Education (Slovenia);

98.34. Apply homogenous human rights standards in the different territories that form the kingdom of the Netherlands, especially in the

Antilles, as recommended by CESCR in 2010 (Spain);

98.35. Strengthen its policies and measures for guaranteeing all socio- economic and cultural rights, and ensure those policies not to impede

the full enjoyment of these rights in the context of global and regional

financial crisis (Viet Nam);

98.36. Develop a system of recording official statistical data on the most widespread crimes and offences committed on the basis of

discrimination taking into account the legal obligations of the

Netherlands in registering such crimes (Uzbekistan);

98.37. Confirm in deed the status of standing invitation to the Special Procedures, in particular by inviting the Special Rapporteurs on the

rights of migrant workers, on trafficking in persons, particularly

women and children, as well as on the sale of children (Belarus);

98.38. Take effective legal and practical measures to eliminate all forms of discrimination and violence against women and children, particularly

women and children belonging to ethnic and religious minorities,

including Muslims who still face multiple forms of discrimination

with respect to education, health, employment and social and political

participation (Iran (Islamic Republic of));

98.39. Ensure that existing statutes prohibiting gender discrimination are properly implemented and enforced, and increase through effective

implementation and enforcement efforts to address violence against

women and children (United States of America);

98.40. Devise more specific measures to eliminate discrimination against women, ethnic minorities, migrants, Muslim and people of African

origin (Thailand);

98.41. Strengthen its actions against on all forms of discrimination and effectively protect the rights of women, children and immigrants

(China);

98.42. Establish mechanisms to monitor, investigate, prosecute and punish incitement to and acts of hatred, intolerance, racism and xenophobia

(Egypt);

98.43. Review, amend and repeal its national discriminatory laws and regulations against persons of certain religious backgrounds, in

particular Muslim migrants (Egypt);

98.44. Take further measures to combat discrimination in the labour market and combat in particular discrimination based on ethnic

origin and discrimination targeting transgender people (France);

98.45. Intensify efforts to combat the dissemination of ideas based on the racial superiority through Internet, as well as other media including

racist speech by political parties (Poland);

98.46. Continue to engage in a national dialogue with a view to promoting respect for diversity and tolerance in line with its obligation under

the ICCPR (India);

98.47. Take all necessary measures to prevent and eliminate all manifestations of racism, Islamophobia, xenophobia, and religious

intolerance (Iran (Islamic Republic of));

98.48. Take more serious measures to prevent and suppress manifestation of racism, xenophobia and intolerance against minority groups in the

country, in particular the Muslims (Malaysia);

98.49. Design a comprehensive policy to address discrimination of national minorities in all areas (Mexico);

98.50. Adopt all the measures necessary to combat discrimination in all its forms, including racism and xenophobia (Nicaragua);

98.51. Develop a national action plan to combat discrimination in consultation with civil society (Norway);

98.52. Appeal the verdict made by the Amsterdam District Court in the case of Geert Wilders on the charges of incitement to hatred and

discrimination (Pakistan);

98.53. Strengthen legal and institutional measures to prevent and suppress manifestations of racism, xenophobia and intolerance (Pakistan);

98.54. Ensure adequate registration of discriminatory motives by raising awareness among the legal profession and law enforcement officials

of the need to recognize aggravated circumstances specific to hate

crimes and discrimination at all levels of prosecution and criminal

procedures (Hungary);

98.55. Make further efforts to combat racial discrimination and xenophobia, and to promote racial and religious harmony (Qatar);

98.56. Continue to take measures and actions in line with the fight against discrimination including through guidelines for website moderators

to keep their websites free from discriminatory content that

constitutes a criminal offence (Romania);

98.57. Adopt measures to stamp out discrimination arising as a result of the practice of racist, ethnic, or religious profiling (Russian Federation);

98.58. Approve a plan of action to fight discrimination, and against any initiatives of political associations or groups that promote racism or

xenophobia (Spain);

98.59. Identify through its domestic discussion effective ways and means to prevent and suppress manifestation of racism, xenophobia and

intolerance (Thailand);

98.60. Follow up on the CESCR recommendation to combat racism and xenophobia and to enforce effectively the legal prohibitions against

discrimination in the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural

rights (Turkey);

98.61. Strengthen policies and measures to prevent and eliminate the manifestations of racism, xenophobia and intolerance in society, in

particular during the national and local electoral campaigns

(Uruguay);

98.62. Take appropriate measures in combating discrimination and marginalization against vulnerable groups, particularly migrants,

minorities, women, children and persons with disabilities (Viet Nam);

98.63. Take more efficient measures to prevent and eliminate manifestations of racism, xenophobia and intolerance in political speech (Algeria);

98.64. Intensify its efforts to eliminate discrimination against migrants and other minority women, who still face multiple forms of discrimination

with respect to education, health, employment and social and political

participation (Azerbaijan);

98.65. Intensify its efforts to eliminate discrimination against migrant, black, Muslim and other minority women, who still face multiple

forms of discrimination (Bangladesh);

98.66. Intensify its efforts to combat the dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority including racist speech by political parties through

the Internet as well as other media (Bangladesh);

98.67. Take measures to address concerns of racial discrimination in the application of its national policies (Botswana);

98.68. Ensure effective national oversight and evaluation of municipal programmes that have been developed to protect the rights enshrined

in Article 1 of the Dutch Constitution concerning prohibited grounds

for discrimination, in particular ensure that these programmes utilize

a broad systematic approach taking into consideration current fiscal

realities (Canada);

98.69. Develop a national plan against racism (Costa Rica);

98.70. Adopt effective measures to combat racism, racial discrimination and incitement to racial hatred, and in particular, to prohibit the

dissemination of racist and xenophobic propaganda (Cuba);

98.71. Fully implement the measures regarding violence against women as outlined in its UPR interim report and consider implementing the

recommendations of the Special Rapporteur on violence against

women and CEDAW (India);

98.72. Adopt effective measures to combat violence against women and to fight poverty (Cuba);

98.73. Adopt effective measures to improve conditions in prisons, reduce overcrowding and eliminate ill- treatment and forced labour of

persons deprived of liberty (Cuba);

98.74. Ensure that in its application of preventive body searches, all relevant human rights are adequately protected, in particular the right to

privacy and physical integrity and the prohibition of discrimination

on the basis of race and religion (Greece);

98.75. Build on this success (achieving a total prohibition of corporal punishment of children in all settings in the European part of the

Dutch territory) and ensure that this prohibition is also duly

implemented in Aruba and the Netherland Antilles by enacting the

necessary legislation in this regard (Hungary);

98.76. Report on the implementation of the 2012-2016 Action Plan against Child Abuse, including sexual violence and child pornography,

during the next interim UPR report (Hungary);

98.77. Intensify efforts to prevent and combat cases of exploitation of children related to sexual tourism, including through legal measures

that effectively protect child victims of sexual exploitation and

prostitution, and to bring the perpetrators of these aberrant practices

to justice (Uruguay);

98.78. Strengthen training of public order officials, social workers and prosecutors on the way to investigate and verify the complaints of

sexual exploitation of children, and prosecute the authors of these

offenses, taking into account child sensitivity (Uruguay);

98.79. Adopt practical measures to ensure absolute prohibition of violence against women and cruel treatment of children (Uzbekistan);

98.80. Carry out actions to improve the current strategy to combat trafficking in human beings, taking into account, among other,

intensifying investigations, training professional staff and creating

assistance centres (Mexico);

98.81. Adopt immediate measures, including reviewing legislation and developing comprehensive strategies to eradicate trafficking in

children, sexual exploitation and involvement of adolescents in

prostitution (Belarus);

98.82. Continue strengthening the functions of the competent institutions and use of adequate mechanisms to more efficiently combat domestic

violence, which mainly affects women and children (Chile);

98.83. Intensify its efforts, at national level and vis-à-vis the different ad-hoc international bodies, to reinforce measures aimed at fighting the use

of children in sexual tourism and child pornography (Chile);

98.84. Seek alternative solutions to deprivation of liberty for minors in particular in order to avoid pre-trial detention of minors, while

awaiting judgement (France);

98.85. Consider additional steps to ensure that any potential changes in court fees are proportionate and affordable, and that they do not

prejudice access to the legal system (United Kingdom of Great

Britain and Northern Ireland);

98.86. Enact laws and legislation on freedom of expression in line with both articles 19 and 20 of the ICCPR (Egypt);

98.87. Step up its efforts to comprehensively address this trend (the trend that political and public figures including media made discriminatory

and discriminatory speech against Muslims), not only from the

freedom of expression perspective but also from socio-cultural point

of view (Indonesia);

98.88. Ensure that the freedom of expression, press freedom and internet freedom will not result in racism, intolerance and hatred against

minority groups (Malaysia);

98.89. Promote more equal representation of men and women in top positions (Norway);

98.90. Adopt measures to criminalize incitement to hatred and imminent violence based on religion or belief (Pakistan);

98.91. Adopt legal provisions for reduced working hours, additional paid holidays or another form of compensation in dangerous and

unhealthy occupations (Poland);

98.92. Take steps to facilitate equal access to the labour market, including by increasing women’s ability to continue as full-time employees

following child birth (Norway);

98.93. Implement measures to decrease the wage gap between men and women (Norway);

98.94. Pursue an active and strict policy to end unfair pay differences between men and women especially in Government organizations

(Greece);

98.95. Ensure that women enjoy equal access to the labour market and equal pay for work of equal value (Slovenia);

98.96. Intensify its efforts to ensure that education, health, employment and social protection programmes are inclusive and not discriminatory.

Apply also these measures to all the countries and territories that

form the kingdom of the Netherlands (Nicaragua);

98.97. Ensure the equal enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights by all individuals and groups under its jurisdiction and adopt a national

plan of action to combat the rise in homelessness (Azerbaijan);

98.98. Establish guidelines for training on human rights in primary and secondary education, with homogenous curricula in all the

educational centres (Spain);

98.99. Facilitate enrolment of children with missing or incomplete documents, improve the safety situation at schools experiencing

difficulties in that regard, and include human rights and child rights

education in school curricula at all levels (Azerbaijan);

98.100. Review and amend national legal and policies integration measures with a view to respect the cultural and religious backgrounds of

migrant communities, in particular Arab and Muslim communities

(Egypt);

98.101. Consider reinstituting the Turkish mother tongue lessons as part of the primary and secondary school curricula (Turkey);

98.102. Strengthen efforts to promote access of persons with disabilities to education and labour market, their legislative protection, in

particular through speeding up approval by the Parliament of the

CRPD (Ukraine);

98.103. Study the possibility to establish new measures aimed at eliminating any discriminatory treatment towards ethnic minorities (Argentina);

98.104. Develop a migration policy, taking into account the international human rights standards in this respect (Guatemala);

98.105. Promote substantive reforms in the immigration policy, which guarantee its conformity with international standards, revoking

measures exposing foreigners to marginalization (Mexico);

98.106. Take all necessary measures, in accordance with international human rights law, to reduce the use of detention of persons solely on grounds

of immigration reasons or because they belong to minority groups

(Nicaragua);

98.107. Review migration policies that exist in the country with a view to ensure the full application of international standards (Paraguay);

98.108. Introduce measures to reduce detention of individuals solely for immigration purposes and consider other alternatives than detention

to use when possible (Sweden);

98.109. Enact public programs to improve integration of Muslim and other immigrants into Dutch society, and build bridges between

communities (United States of America);

98.110. Protect the social and cultural rights of migrants while taking integration measures and policies aimed at migrants (Bangladesh);

98.111. In coordination with OHCHR, IOM, ILO and relevant special procedures of the Human Rights Council, develop a comprehensive

strategy to protect the rights of migrants and persons belonging to

ethnic minorities (Belarus);

98.112. Due to the criminalization of irregular residency in the country, design alternatives for the detention of irregular or undocumented

immigrants (Brazil);

98.113. Reduce the number of persons in the detention centres for migrants and create alternative measures to detention, especially for families

with children or unaccompanied minors (Ecuador);

98.114. Improve the conditions of migrants detention centres, especially with regard to the medical and psychological attention, as well as contact

with the outside (Ecuador);

98.115. Review asylum procedures with a view to expediting the decisions in the cases of children asylum seekers as quickly as possible and

facilitating family reunion of vulnerable children in an efficient and

appropriate manner (United States of America);

98.116. Ensure increased transparency and oversight exercised by civil society of the conditions, in which asylum seekers are kept and

treated (Russian Federation);

98.117. Consider additional measures to ensure that the interests of children are properly taken into account in provisions for asylum seeking

families, since they are especially impacted by long delays and

uncertainty (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern

Ireland);

98.118. Carry out investigations into complaints and information on cruel treatments during the expulsions of foreigners from the Netherlands

and ensure transparency when investigating such complaints

(Uzbekistan);

98.119. Contribute effectively in the operationalization of the right to development at the international level (Pakistan).

Annex

[English only]

Composition of the delegation

The delegation of the Netherlands was headed by H.E. Ms. Liesbeth Spies, Head of Delegation, Minister of Interior and Kingdom Relations; and composed of the following members:

• H.E. Mr. Arthur Dowers, Minister of Justice and Education, Aruba;

• H.E. Mr. Roderick van Schreven, Permanent Representative of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, Geneva;

• Ms. Marilyn Haimé, Director Constitutional Affairs and legislation, Ministry of Interior and Kingdom Relations;

• Mr. Oswald Dalnoot, Secretary General, Ministry of Social Development, Labor and Welfare, Curacao;

• Ms. Susanna Terstal, Deputy Permanent Representative, Permanent Representation of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, Geneva;

• Mr. Paul van Sasse van Ysselt, Supervising Legal Advisor, Ministry of Interior and Kingdom Relations;

• Ms. Wieke Vink, Senior Policy Advisor, Ministry of Interior and Kingdom Relations;

• Mr. Roeland Böcker, Senior Policy Officer at Legal Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs;

• Ms. Karin Dekker, Head of Global Affairs, Ministry of Education Culture and Science;

• Mr. Reinier ter Kuile, Director Youth Policy, Ministry of Security and Justice;

• Mr. Pieter Verrest, Legislation Department, Ministry of Security and Justice;

• Mr. Tijs Manten, Spokesperson of Minister Spies, Minister of Interior and Kingdom Relations;

• Mr. Paul Peters, Counsellor, Permanent Representation of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, Geneva;

• Ms. Olivia Croes, Legal Advisor, Department of Foreign Affairs Aruba;

• Ms. Danae Daal, Policy Officer, International Affairs Department, Saint Martin;

• Ms. Ludmilla Vicento, Public Prosecutor, Curacao;

• Ms. Ann Philipps, Senior Policy Advisor International Relations, Directorate of Foreign Affairs, Curacao;

• Mr. Roland Driece, Health Attaché, Permanent Representation of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, Geneva;

• Ms. Marjolijn Luchtmeijer, Second Secretary Permanent Representation of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, Geneva.