A/HRC/55/47 specific circumstances of the case, including the use of background music in a terrorist attack.64 V. Countering hatred and transformative approaches 36. Debates concerning the most effective approach to addressing advocacy of hatred on the basis of religion or belief continue to centre primarily on legal restrictions, including the criminalization of expressions of hatred. Such debates are important and necessary. The Rabat Plan of Action has contributed to the practical navigation of this thorny issue by judicial authorities. It is submitted that the remaining tensions and challenges would benefit from focusing attention on the question of root causes and engagement with substantive equality, considering approaches that do not respond, post facto, to individual incidents, but rather transform the cultural and structural factors that produce those incidents. Furthermore, given the increasingly transnational nature of manifestations of hatred and their reappropriation in different contexts, there is a strong need to address the phenomenon through renewed multilateral cooperation. A. Criminalization and counter-speech 37. Article 20 (2) of the Covenant imposes an obligation on States to prohibit advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence. The Rabat Plan of Action synthesizes the international legal framework and supports the response to related issues as they arise. The above-mentioned threshold test provides a guide as to cases where restrictions on freedoms of expression, assembly and religion or belief may be legitimate and necessary. Disregarding the careful contextual consideration that article 20 (2) requires would seriously risk inhibiting rather than protecting freedom of religion or belief65 and other rights. 38. While there is a role for criminal justice in combating advocacy of hatred that constitutes incitement, the effectiveness of criminalization may be limited (usually in individual cases) and may prove far from transformative. It may also prove to be counterproductive, cultivating an environment conducive to further hatred. It is also likely to have a broader chilling effect on debate,66 since law enforcement institutions themselves may be characterized by prejudicial attitudes that inhibit reporting and encourage impunity. 67 Vague or far-reaching laws against advocacy of hatred, or blasphemy, offence to religious feelings and similar offences are not only arbitrary,68 they can also lead to the direct and structural marginalization of religious or belief communities. 69 The serious risks of anti-blasphemy provisions and their instrumentalization in the denial of freedom of religion or belief have been expounded at length in the observations of the mandate, as well as in the jurisprudence of international human rights mechanisms, including the Human Rights Committee.70 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 GE.23-25950 See https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/religion/2023-10-19-EOM-srreligion.docx. A/HRC/2/3, para. 50. Submissions by Search for Common Ground; Alliance Defending Freedom International; SOVA Research Center; Northern Justice Watch; Open Doors International; National Christian Evangelical Alliance Sri Lanka; National Secular Society; and Ahmadiyya Muslim Community Foreign Relations Office. Submissions by Ahmadiyya Muslim Community Foreign Relations Office; Center for Social Justice; Joint Initiative for Strategic Religious Action Partners, Indonesia; and World Jewish Congress. A/HRC/22/17/Add.4, appendix, para. 15: “The broader the definition of incitement to hatred is in domestic legislation, the more it opens the door for arbitrary application of the laws.” Submissions by ADF International; Memorial; Christian Solidarity Worldwide; Ex-Muslims of North America; South Asia Collective; Jubilee Campaign. See also communications sent to India (IND 6/2023), Pakistan (PAK 3/2023) and Sri Lanka (LKA 3/2023). Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 34 (2011), para. 48; A/71/269, paras. 45 and 46; A/73/362, paras. 48–49; A/HRC/13/40, para. 39; A/HRC/22/51, paras. 53 and 66; A/HRC/25/58, para. 70; A/HRC/31/18, paras. 59–60; and A/HRC/40/58, paras. 33–34. 11