A/HRC/16/53/Add.1 amend it. Therefore the entire conduct of the National Media and Telecommunications Authority was under the supervision of the courts. 158. The Government was confident that the above explanations relating to the Hungarian legislation on media services provided the Special Rapporteurs with the further insight necessary to assess the conformity of the legislation with fundamental rights, and in particular with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Should the Special Rapporteurs consider it necessary, the Government was willing to provide further clarifications necessary for the finalisation of the Special Rapporteurs’ report. The Government also informed that it was currently in negotiations with the European Commission relating to possible amendments to the Hungarian legislation. (c) Observations by the Special Rapporteur 159. The Special Rapporteur is grateful that the Government of Hungary replied by letter of 2 February 2011 to the joint communication of 18 January 2011. He wishes to take this opportunity to refer to his framework for communications, more specifically to the international human rights norms and to the mandate practice concerning the intersection of freedom of religion or belief with other human rights, including freedom of expression (see para. 1 above, category D. 1.). 160. In this context, the Special Rapporteur would also like to refer to OHCHR’s expert workshops on the prohibition of incitement to national, racial or religious hatred.2 The objective of these expert workshops in 2011 is to gain a better understanding of legislative patterns, judicial practices and policies in the different regions of the world with regard to the concept of incitement to national, racial, or religious hatred, while ensuring full respect for freedom of expression as outlined in articles 19 and 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; to arrive at a comprehensive assessment of the state of implementation of this prohibition of incitement in conformity with international human rights law; and to identify possible actions at all levels. I. India 1. Communication sent on 20 January 2005 (a) Allegations transmitted to the Government 161. The Special Rapporteur brought to the attention of the Government information she had received according to which, following the tsunami disaster, in Tamil Nadu, a number of Dalits had been denied aid supplies and expelled from relief camps by higher caste groups who refused to eat with them or live under the same roof (see E/CN.4/2006/5/Add.1, para. 140). In the relief camps of the port town of Nagapattinam, Dalits were allegedly not being allowed to drink water from tanks placed by UNICEF. In the tsunami-hit areas, food and cash distributions normally took place in Hindu temples, often the only structures still standing because they were built from solid granite. Reports indicated that Dalits were left out in these distributions due to the fact that as “untouchables” they were not allowed to enter the halls of worship. Dalits had allegedly carried out much of the initial work in the immediate aftermath of the disaster such as carrying away dead bodies and disposing animal carcasses because upper caste people consider such work taboo and socially degrading. 2 34 www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/opinion/articles1920_iccpr/index.htm.