A/HRC/25/58/Add.2 VII. Religious extremism 45. One topic that came up in a number of discussions concerned religious extremism. Obviously, Jordan has a tradition of religious moderation, and extreme interpretations of religious traditions have to date had only marginal influence. The Special Rapporteur, however, frequently heard concerns that this might change in the long term given that some radical voices within both Christianity and Islam seemed to be gaining ground. When assessing this problem, differences between urban and rural areas, as well as between different social and economic strata of the society, must be taken into account, since they may have an enormous impact. 46. Religious extremism typically implies the rejection of pluralism not only among religions but also – and often in even more aggressive ways – within the same religion. As many manifestations of hostility in the Arab region sadly demonstrate, the divide between different branches of Islam is currently widening. Jordan, with its overwhelming majority of Sunni Muslims, has fortunately not seen any serious intra-Muslim conflicts, and it is not likely that they will break out in the foreseeable future. Nonetheless, the Special Rapporteur heard stories of mounting resentment against Shias. Apart from politically motivated hostility, this resentment may also reflect religious stereotypes that should be critically addressed in school education and through other initiatives. It seems advisable to accommodate a sufficient degree of intra-religious diversity in initiatives of interreligious dialogue. Such projects should ensure the full participation of women, who often are forgotten or marginalized in projects focused on promoting interreligious and intrareligious communication. 47. When addressing religious extremism, the Government of Jordan relies on, inter alia, restrictive measures, as was openly admitted by some representatives of the Government. These measures may include banning certain books or websites deemed to exacerbate divisions between and within religious communities. The Special Rapporteur would like to reiterate that freedom of religion or belief and freedom of expression are closely intertwined and mutually reinforce each other. The positive interrelatedness of both norms has also found recognition in the Rabat Plan of Action on the prohibition of advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.6 While setting a high threshold for restrictive measures against extreme forms of hate speech, which have to meet a number of precisely defined criteria to be legitimate, the Rabat Plan of Action emphasizes the need for “alternative speech”. For instance, to challenge advocates of hatred in their usual claims to speak in the name of “the silent majority”, it is important that the majority does not remain silent. Civil society activities that visibly and audibly reject manifestations of hatred can be very effective in discouraging those advocating hatred, while at the same time encouraging their targets who should feel that have not been left alone. The Plan of Action specifically calls upon political and religious leaders to speak out firmly and promptly against intolerance, discriminatory stereotyping and instances of hate speech. Other measures recommended in the Plan of Action include voluntary ethical guidelines for media reporting connected with selfregulatory supervision, support for community media, the facilitation of non-discriminatory participation of minorities also within media catering to mainstream society, interreligious and intra-religious dialogue initiatives, public awareness-raising campaigns and educational efforts in schools. 6 14 Adopted at the final expert meeting held in Rabat in October 2012 at the conclusion of a series of regional expert workshops organized by OHCHR See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/TheRabatPlanofAction.aspx.