of the Baha'i community and the restrictions on freedom of religion in general. It was hoped that the dialogue with the Committee would provide useful information for the Moroccan Government and would encourage further improvements in the protection of human rights. 78. The representative of the reporting State expressed his appreciation to Committee members for the keen interest they had shown in the consideration of the report. Due note had been taken of the Committee's comments, which would be conveyed to the Moroccan authorities. 79. In concluding the consideration of the second periodic report of Morocco, the Chairman thanked the delegation for its cooperation. He emphasized the importance of constant review of domestic legislation and -practice in accordance with the provisions of the Covenant and stated that the dialogue with the Committee should be used for that purpose. AUSTRIA 80. The Committee considered the second periodic report of Austria (CCPE/C/51/Add.2) at its 1098th, 1099th and 1100th meetings, held on 24 and 25 October 1991 (CCPR/C/SR.1098, SR.1099 and SR.1100). (For the composition of the delegation, see annex VIII.) 81. The report was introduced by the representative of the State party, who drew members' attention, in particular, to the fact that the Second Optional Protocol aiming at the abolition of the cteath penalty was currently before the Austrian Parliament, with ratification expected in early 1992, Constitutional and legal framework within which the Covenant is implemented 82. With reference to that issue, members asked what measures Austria had taken to give effect to the rights recognized in the Covenant and whether there were any difficulties in that regard. Members also inquired about the remedies available to individuals whose rights under the Covenant had been violated. Concerning the promotion of human rights, they wished to know, in particular, whether a commission, ombudsman or similar institution would be established, as well as about measures taken to increase public awareness of the Covenant and the Optional Protocol, 83. Members were concerned about the status of the Covenant, given that Austria had incorporated into its domestic law the European Convention on Human Rights, but not the Covenant. They wondered whether those parts of the Covenant that were not reflected in the European Convention, if not the Covenant in its entirety, could be incorporated into Austria's domestic law. In addition, members wished to know whether there was any governmental machinery for monitoring legislation to ensure its compatibility with Austria's international obligations under the Covenant; how complaints would be handled in the light of the provisions of the Optional Protocol; and whether there was any legal procedure under which the provisions of the Covenant could be abrogated. Members were also concerned about the reservations to the Covenant and the Optional Protocol entered by Austria and wondered whether the withdrawal of some of them was being considered. -18-