A/74/253 principles of legality, proportionality and necessity, and that less serious cases should be dealt with using non-criminal sanctions. 37 52. Unfortunately, sometimes Member States use concerns about racist or intolerant speech as a pretext for illegitimately quashing expression that is compliant with human rights. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has observed with concern that broad or vague restrictions on freedom of speech have been used to the detriment of groups protected by the Convention. The Special Rapporteur endorses the Committee’s position that international human rights law prohibits States from using measures to monitor and combat racist speech as a pretext to curtail expressions of protest at injustice, social discontent or opposition. 38 Overly broad defamation and slander laws that target minority religious groups, political opponents, academics, human rights defenders or others who appropriately exercise their freedom of expression should not be tolerated. The Special Rapporteur also strongly condemns attempts by public and private actors to co -opt the language of equality and non-discrimination as a means of stifling legitimate expression. Similarly, she further condemns attempts by public and priva te actors to use the language of freedom of expression or association as a means of, or cover for, violating the rights of others to equality and non-discrimination. 53. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has highlighted that, although article 4 has operated as the principle vehicle for the prohibition of racist speech, the Convention contains other provisions essential for fulfilling the objectives articulated in that article. Article 4 expressly invokes article 5, which guarantees the right to equality before the law and the right to be free from racial discrimination in the enjoyment of rights, including freedom of expression. Article 6 requires the provision of effective remedies for violations of rights enshrined in the Convention, as indicated above, and article 7 underscores the importance of education in promoting equality and tolerance. 54. In paragraph 84 of the Durban Declaration, the participants at the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance condemned the persistence and resurgence of neo -Nazism, neo-fascism and violent nationalist ideologies based on racial or national prejudice. In paragraph 85 of the Declaration, they condemned political platforms and organizations based on, among other things, doctrines of racial superiority and related discrimination, as well as legislation and practices based on racism, r acial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, highlighting that they were incompatible with democracy and transparent and accountable governance. Furthermore, participating States reaffirmed, in paragraph 94 of the Declaration, that the stigmatization of people of different origins by acts or omissions of public authorities, institutions, the media, political parties or national or local organizations was not only an act of racial discrimination but could also incite the recurrence of such acts, thereby resulting in the creation of a vicious circle that reinforces racist attitudes and prejudices and requires universal condemnation. 55. The Rabat Plan of Action on the prohibition of advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence also contains a high threshold for restrictions on freedom of expression. 39 It outlines a six-part threshold test in keeping with the approach of the Committee on the __________________ 37 38 39 16/19 Ibid., para. 12. See also Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 34 (2011), paras. 22–25 and 33–35. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, general recommendation No. 35 (2013), para. 20. For details about the Rabat Plan of Action and its consultation process, see www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/FreedomOpinion/Articles19-20/Pages/Index.aspx. 19-12969