A/66/313 interdependence more obvious than in the discussion on freedom of expression and incitement to national, racial or religious hatred. He strongly emphasized that freedom of expression and the demands of a pluralist, tolerant, broad-minded and democratic society needed to be taken into consideration in all cases being examined. Freedom of expression had to be understood in a positive sense as one of the essential foundations of a democratic and pluralistic society. It had to be guaranteed equally for all as a way to combat racism and discrimination. With the exercise of that freedom, an atmosphere of respect and understanding between peoples, cultures and religions had to be generated. 18. The Special Rapporteur further recalled that the OHCHR expert seminar on articles 19 and 20 of the Covenant, held in Geneva in October 2008, identified some objective criteria to prevent arbitrary application of national legal standards pertaining to incitement to racial or religious hatred: the public intent of inciting discrimination, hostility or violence must be present for hate speech to be penalized; any limitations on freedom of expression should be clearly and narrowly defined, provided by law, necessary and proportionate to the objective they propound to achieve, i.e., prohibiting hate speech; limitations should not threaten the exercise of the right itself; the least intrusive means insofar as freedom of expression is concerned should be used to prevent a chilling effect; and the adjudication of such limitations should be made by an independent and impartial judiciary. The Special Rapporteur also referred to the Camden Principles on Freedom of Expression and Equality, 5 which provide useful guidance for the interpretation of international law and standards, inter alia, with regard to incitement to hatred. In that regard, he reiterated Principle 12, which clarifies that “the terms ‘hatred’ and ‘hostility’ refer to intense and irrational emotions of opprobrium, enmity and detestation towards the target group”, that “the term ‘advocacy’ is to be understood as requiring an intention to promote hatred publicly towards the target group” and that “the term ‘incitement’ refers to statements about national, racial or religious groups which create an imminent risk of discrimination, hostility or violence against persons belonging to those groups”. 19. In the joint written submissions, the Special Rapporteur also noted the positive development of the adoption, on 24 March 2011, by the Human Rights Council, without a vote, of resolution 16/18, entitled “Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization of, and discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence against, persons based on religion or belief”. He expressed his appreciation that the Human Rights Council had, after years of debate, ultimately found a way to unanimously address those worrying phenomena without referring to concepts or notions that would undermine international human rights law. In that context, the Special Rapporteur emphasized the principle that individuals rather than religions per se were the rights-holders. 3. Extremist political parties, movements and groups, including neo-Nazis and skinhead groups, and similar extremist ideological movements 20. With regard to the issue of extremist political parties, movements and groups, including neo-Nazi and skinhead groups, and similar extremist ideological __________________ 5 11-45818 http://www.article19.org/data/files/pdfs/standards/the-camden-principles-on-freedom-ofexpression-and-equality.pdf. 7