A/HRC/25/58 of communication are needed between different parts of the United Nations system to enable decision makers to take appropriate and timely action. In this context, the Special Rapporteur commends a recent document on preventing atrocity crimes, prepared by the Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect, in particular its paragraphs on the need to prepare contingency plans.15 (c) Atmosphere in which public debates on religious issues can flourish 51 As outlined earlier, an authoritarian climate that discourages people from publicly expressing their various concerns tends to increase the likelihood of manifestations of religious hatred occurring in a country. Where a culture of free public discourse does not exist, negative rumours are likely to remain within closed circles and to avoid sufficient exposure to critical public scrutiny. Even worse, those who have lived for a long time in a repressive climate may develop a distorted “mentality of suspicion”, where they assume hidden agendas. As a consequence, the dichotomy between thinking and speaking, which people may have experienced in their own personal behaviour, is often also ascribed to other individuals or groups. Likewise, the dichotomy between private narratives and public propositions may become the interpretative background for any public statements made by individuals, groups or organizations, resulting in a society that is marked by general mistrust and suspicion. As a result, trustful communication may become increasingly difficult and may yield more and more to mere tactical rhetorical manoeuvres. In extreme cases this may culminate in a total breakdown of any meaningful intergroup communication, a collapse of the culture of public discourse and in unchecked prejudices and misconceptions. 52. The most promising antidote to a society beleaguered by a combination of paranoia and contempt is a well-developed culture of public discourse in which people feel encouraged to exercise their freedom of expression. Such a culture should also allow for the expression of any concerns, worries, anxieties and less pleasant experiences in the area of religious pluralism. Living together in a pluralistic society can certainly be enriching, but it is not always easy and at times can even become quite challenging. When people feel they have the freedom to publicly express any frustrations and irritations that may arise from their adverse experiences, instead of merely telling negative stories in private circles, there remains a good chance that counter-evidence and the promulgation of alternative narratives may help restore realistic proportion and perspective. This may prevent negative experiences from hardening into fixed prejudices. A culture of public discourse should thus enable people to conduct controversial discussions in the area of religious diversity, which naturally must also accommodate criticism of certain religions or even of religion in general. 53. Attempts to replace negative stereotypes about other religious communities or minorities by superficially imposing positive language and discouraging the articulation of adverse experiences are only likely to raise suspicion in the long run. A more promising strategy aims at overcoming misperceptions by facilitating the articulation of real experiences in the interaction of human beings, both as individuals and as communities. After all, sustainable trust can develop only on the basis of realism and by taking seriously the experiences that people have. Inter alia, such a realist strategy presupposes the availability of differentiated information by nuanced research and reporting, including on religious community issues. Investigative journalism, which is often wrongly suspected of undermining social peace, can serve as a necessary ingredient of trust-building policies, 15 14 See Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect, “Preventing incitement: policy options for action”, presented in a side event at the sixth session of the Forum on Minority Issues, on 27 November 2013.

Select target paragraph3