A/HRC/11/36 page 6 reaffirming that “all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination as well as all acts of violence or incitement to such acts shall be declared an offence punishable by law, in accordance with the international obligations of States and that these prohibitions are consistent with freedom of opinion and expression”. 10. The Special Rapporteur welcomes the fact that the outcome document focused exclusively on the language of legal provisions as established by international instruments, in particular the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. The fact that the outcome document was adopted by consensus confirms that the language from these instruments is indeed the way forward in the approach to difficult questions, such as that of incitement to racial or religious hatred. 11. The Special Rapporteur would also like to highlight the joint statement he delivered with the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, Asma Jahangir, and the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue, during a side event at the Durban Review Conference on incitement to racial or religious hatred.1 In particular, the three mandate holders stated that it was necessary to anchor the debate on these issues in the relevant existing international legal framework, provided for by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Whereas the Covenant provided for freedom of expression, it also clearly defined limitations to it, such as in articles 19 and 20. Furthermore, article 20 (2) required States to prohibit expressions if they amount to advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility and violence. However, defining which acts might trigger article 20 remained difficult. They asked what constituted incitement to violence, hostility or discrimination and where the line between criticism - even if deemed offensive - and hate speech should be drawn. From a legal perspective, they affirmed that each set of facts was particular and could only be assessed and adjudicated, whether by a judge or another impartial body, according to its own circumstances and taking into account the specific context. D. Next steps: transforming pledges into action 12. Many of the provisions contained in the outcome document of the Durban Review Conference would not have been needed had the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action been properly and effectively implemented. Unfortunately, not only is racism still pervasive around the world, but the appropriate institutions, legislation and policy needed to adequately fight this problem are not in place in most countries. 13. The key challenge in the next few years is therefore to transform the pledges and commitments made in the outcome document of the Durban Review Conference, as well as in the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action itself, into concrete actions that truly have an impact on the lives of those directly affected by racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. The Special Rapporteur recalls that most of the responsibility for implementing such actions lies with the State, as the outcome document recognizes. National 1 http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/racism/rapporteur/docs/Joint_Statement_SRs.pdf.