407, In his reply, the representative of the State party explained that the Employment Act of 1989 had made it possible for employer6 to offer training to members of particular ethnic groups, and that positive action had also been taken within the civil service in favour of women and members of ethnic minorities. The Rar Council had recently taken positive action to help barristers belonging to ethnic minorities to develop the requisite experience. Anyone who felt unfairly treated under the revised procedures for “vatting” of certain candidates for the civil service could bring the matter to an independent tribunal or the permanent head of the department concerned. Although under the electoral system currently used in the united Kingdom the number of members of Parliament did not directly reflect the number of votes cast, it was considered that a system of proportional representation could give minority parties a disproportionate influence in Parliament. Civil servants were free to enter local governments and national politics. 400. With reference to that issue, members of the Committee wished to receive a list of groups and their approximate membership of ethnic minorities who0 according to the report, “regarded themselves as such”. 409. In his reply, the representative figures on ethnic minorities provided of the State party referred to detailed in the report (CCPR/C/SS/Add.l2). 410. Members of the Committee expressed their thanks to the representatives of the State party for their cooperation in presenting the third periodic report of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and for having engaged in a fruitful and constructive dialogue with the Committee. It was clear that progress had been made in the area of safeguarding human rights since the submission of the second periodic report. Positive developments in the United Kingdom in such areas as criminal justice, prison conditions and family law reform had, for instance, been reported, and the review of matters relating to evidence and jurisdiction by the Royal Commission was particularly welcomed. 411. At the same time, it was noted that some of the concerns expressed by members of the Committee had not been fully allayed. With respect to Northern Ireland, concern was expressed over the excessive powers enjoyed by police under anti-terrorism laws: about the liberal rule6 regarding the use of firearms by the police; and about the many emergency measures and their ’ prolonged application. In that regard, it was noted that some of the procedures foilowecl with respect to the application of conditional release and the admissibility of evidence should have been the subject of an express’ clwroqation under article 4 of the Covenant. Other areas of concern included provisions relating to legal aid, which seemed excessively restricted; aeylum seekers and discrimination in the application of immigration laws; the right of appeal under article 14 of the Covenant, which was not sufficiently guaranteed under the United Kingdom’s criminal justice system; the legislation on blasphemy; restrictions on freedom of information under the Broadcasting Act; and the exercise of censorship through court injunction6 that prevented the publication or broadcasting of information. The hope was also expre66ed that the Government would review its reservations with respect to the Covenant -102-