A/77/512 must remain exceptional. When individuals or groups meet this high threshold, including in the context of antisemitic hate speech, States must hold these actors to account for their violations of international human rights law. 85. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has reiterated that freedom of expression is integrated into the Convention and that the Convention contributes to a fuller understanding of the parameters of freedom of expression un der international human rights law. For determining what racist expression should be punishable by law, the Committee stresses the importance of context, which includes: (a) the content and form of the speech; (b) the economic, social and political climate ; (c) the position or status of the speaker; (d) the reach of the speech; and (e) the objectives of the speech. Member States, and even private actors such as the technology companies that often directly interface with racist and xenophobic content online, must remain vigilant in their identification of racist expression in national climates in which certain groups, including neo-Nazis, are openly committed to spreading and enforcing intolerance. The Committee warns that racist speech may sometimes rely on indirect language to disguise its targets or objectives, and may rely on coded symbolic communication to achieve its ends. Even incitement may be express or implied, through actions such as displays of racist symbols or the distribution of materials as well as words. 86. Member States must take urgent action to ensure that racist expressions violating the standards set out in the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination are made punishable by law. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has recommended that the criminalization of forms of racist expression be reserved for serious cases, to be proven beyond reasonable doubt, that the application of criminal sanctions be governed by the principles of legality, proportionality and necessity, and that less serious cases should be dealt with using non-criminal sanctions. 87. The Special Rapporteur also recalls that in paragraph 84 of the Durban Declaration, States Members of the United Nations 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 Decl aration, 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, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related into lerance, highlighting that they were incompatible with democracy and transparent and accountable governance. Member States also 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 reinforced racist attitudes and prejudices and required universal condemnation. V. Conclusions and recommendations 88. The Special Rapporteur urges States to comply fully with their obligations as enshrined in article 4 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and reiterates her encouragement to those States that have made reservations to article 4 of the Convention to withdraw those reservations and commit to the obligation to tackle hate speech and incitement to violence. 18/20 22-22915