A/HRC/39/CRP.2 1304. The Mission undertook an in-depth examination of the types of messages and narratives that are spread in such hate campaigns, as well as the Myanmar authorities’ role and response. It considered such assessment critical in light of the alleged role of “hate speech” in the outbreaks of violence across Myanmar, but also because some observers have suggested a link between “hate speech” and the opening of democratic space in Myanmar, including increased levels of freedom of expression, a freer publishing and media environment, and easier access to the Internet and social media. 1. Legal framework 1305. The issue of “hate speech” should be considered in light of both the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and the rights to equality and non-discrimination. In principle, the right to freedom of opinion and expression embraces even expression that may be deeply offensive.2876 However, under international human rights law, the exercise of human rights must not violate the rights and freedoms of others. Manifestations and expressions of deeprooted hatred can undermine the rights of others under certain circumstances. 2877 With this in mind, international law distinguishes between expressions of hate that must be prohibited, those that may be prohibited, and those that should be protected from restriction. 1306. Expressions of hate that must be prohibited under international law include the direct and public incitement to commit genocide 2878; any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence 2879; and all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, and on incitement to racial discrimination.2880 In contrast, the exercise of freedom of expression may be restricted where it presents a serious danger for others and for their enjoyment of human rights. Such restrictions must be provided by law in a clear and precise manner; be necessary in a democratic society for the respect of the rights or reputations of others or for the protection of national security or public order; and be proportionate. 2881 Forms of expression that do not fall under these categories, even where they are deeply offensive, are lawful and should be protected from restriction. This does not mean, however, that such speech should be considered acceptable. It may still pose a problem in terms of tolerance and may require a critical response from the State, in particular to address the underlying prejudices of which the speech is a symptom. 1307. While there is no definition of the term “hate speech” under international human rights law, this report uses it to refer to any expression of violent or discriminatory hatred towards people. In this sense, it encompasses expressions from each of the above mentioned categories (those that must be prohibited, those that may be prohibited, and those that must not be prohibited but may require a critical response). 1308. In resolution 34/22, the Human Rights Council calls on the Government of Myanmar to take further action to address the issue of hate speech in accordance with its resolution 16/18 and the Rabat Plan of Action. Human Rights Council resolution 16/18 on “intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatisation of, and discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence against persons based on religion or belief” sets out an action plan for addressing intolerance based on religion and belief. It rests on the rationale that the promotion of inclusion, diversity and pluralism is the best antidote to intolerant expression, coupled with polices and laws to tackle the root causes of discrimination. The Rabat Plan of Action, adopted by experts following a consultative process under the auspices of OHCHR, provides authoritative guidance to States on the prohibition of “any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence”. 2882 The 2876 2877 2878 2879 2880 2881 2882 United Nations Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 34 (CCPR/C/GC/34). A/67/357, para. 37. Genocide Convention, art. III (c). ICCPR, art. 20 (2). International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, art. 4. See this chapter, section A.1: Legal toolbox for restricting fundamental freedoms. A/HRC/22/17/Add.4. See also: https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/FreedomReligion/Pages/RabatPlanOfAction.aspx. 321