A/72/365 facilitating State-to-State dialogue and the sharing of experiences on best practices and lessons learned from implementing the action plan set out in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the resolution. The process focuses on novel, constructive and context -based approaches to combating religious intolerance, including advocacy of religious hatred constituting incitement. In this regard, approaches that support data-driven analysis and qualitative information and illustrate the impact of national initiatives and mechanisms aimed at combating religious intolerance are absolutely essential. 55. The full potential of the Istanbul Process remains untapped. To date, six conferences have been held in various countries since the adoption of resolution 16/18, and the Special Rapporteur regrets that there is no clarity as to when and where the seventh meeting will be convened. The formats, contexts, participants and agendas for the meetings have varied widely. Some have served as opportunities for sharing success stories and generating recommendations for achieving the goals expressed in the resolution, while others have been criticized for lacking inclusivity, failing to comprehensively examine various parts of the resolution or re -engaging in polarizing debates. C. Rabat Plan of Action 56. The Special Rapporteur confirms his support for the Rabat Plan of Action, endorsed by his predecessor in his 2013 report to the Human Rights Council (A/HRC/25/58). The Plan of Action provides a framework for understanding the obligation under article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to prohibit the advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence and offers a road map for its implementation in line with international human rights standards. It emphasizes the interdependence of human rights and recognizes the critical role they play in shaping an environment in which “constructive discussion about religious matters could be held”, and notes that open debate and dialogue are “the soundest way to probe whether religious interpretations adhere to or distort the original values that underpin religious belief”. The Plan of Action offers guidance on the implementation of legislation, jurisprudence and policies intended to combat advocacy of hatred that constitutes incitement and provides recommendations for policies that foster space for free and open discussions, promote respect for diversity and contribute to inclusion. 57. With respect to government policies, it is recommended in the Rabat Plan of Action that States encourage pluralism so that all communities are granted opportunities to make meaningful contributions to national discussions and to shaping responsive strategies for combating intolerance that may constitute incitement within various societies. States are also called upon to sensitize law enforcement officials to issues related to the prohibition of incitement to hatred, and several recommendations that stakeholders, including civil society organizations, establish mechanisms and dialogues that “foster intercultural and interreligious understanding and learning” are outlined. 58. In terms of legislation, States are encouraged in the Rabat Plan of Action to define incitement to hatred narrowly, recalling that “the broader the definition of incitement to hatred is in domestic legislation, the more it opens the door for arbitrary application of the laws”. The permissibility of restrictions on freedom of expression is measured by the three-part test of legality, proportionality and necessity. For the development of jurisprudence, the Plan of Action offers six factors for national courts to consider when assessing whether a specific instance of speech should be restricted or punished as incitement: the context, the speaker, the 16/24 17-14822