A/72/365 intolerance to advance their re-engagement in wider society positively through coexistence, harmony and respect for the rule of law, and to pursue peaceful social change. 78. The Special Rapporteur, therefore, encourages all stakeholders, including States, faith leaders and civil society, to fully utilize the recommendations outlined in resolution 16/18, the Rabat Plan of Action, the Fez Plan of Action and the Beirut Declaration. Religious literacy and interfaith dialogue can play a vital role in identifying the common good and promoting respect for pluralism. As stressed in the Beirut Declaration, all believers — whether theistic, non-theistic, atheistic or other — should join hands and hearts in articulating ways in which “faith” can stand up for “rights” more effectively, so that each enhances the other. Rejecting expressions of hatred within one’s own community and extending solidarity and support across faith or belief boundaries are honourable and meaningful actions. 79. Many Member States and other stakeholders agree that United Nations tools developed for combating manifestations of intolerance based on religion or belief have not been used to their fullest potential and that further steps to strengthen international processes for implementation are necessary. In this regard, the Special Rapporteur encourages Member States to improve the capacity of the Istanbul Process to fully function as a mechanism for implementation. To date, the Process has received varied levels of consideration from Member States, depending on evaluations by foreign ministries in national capitals. Deeper and broader commitment could add value. 80. As such, diplomatic officials should work to orient its national experts across a range of ministries and policy fields, such as those in justice, interior, education and social affairs departments, to better operationalize this national engagement with Human Rights Council resolution 16/18. Relatively few States provide detailed information on national steps taken to implement the resolution, and little to no analysis of the impact that national measures and strategies may have had on furthering the goals of resolution 16/18 have been offered in reports to date. The Special Rapporteur recommends that steps be taken to streamline State engagement with the reporting mechanism to improve the consistency an d quality of reporting and facilitate impact analysis. It is also strongly recommended that civil society organizations, national human rights institutions and international organizations be allowed to share their experiences, views and best practices in this process (see A/HRC/34/35, para. 117). 81. As a mechanism for implementation, the Istanbul Process should seek to regularize introspective intergovernmental exchanges of experiences, best practices and lessons learned. Meetings should also be held regularly to assess the impact of specific measures and explore the effectiveness of the myriad strategies advanced by States for implementing resolution 16/18. Agendas for a calendar of future meetings should include periodic engagement with the resolution. Meetings should be apolitical and geared towards facilitating peerto-peer exchanges among an inclusive pool of experts and practitioners — particularly those on the front lines of promoting and protecting right s — including educators, faith leaders, social workers, legal and human rights experts, rights advocates, experts in law enforcement and the media. Moreover, efforts to supplement those discussions with data-driven analysis and qualitative information should be undertaken. 82. As such, the collection of reliable data on hate crimes and statistics, which may speak to the effectiveness of measures taken to combat manifestations of intolerance based on religion or belief, is also crucial. However, the issue of data collection (or the lack thereof) should not be instrumentalized as a political tool and must, instead, represent a commitment by all States to monitor and report 17-14822 23/24