New York, 21 April 2015

I thank the President of the General Assembly and the UN Secretary General for organizing this important and timely High-Level Thematic Debate on Promoting Tolerance and Reconciliation: Fostering Peaceful, Inclusive Societies and Countering Violent Extremism.

The topic of the debate is very timely. We all wish to live in peaceful and inclusive societies, in which violent extremism is not able to grow. We are all alarmed by the violent extremism which shakes our fundamental beliefs.

Just on 1 April, the Human Rights Council held a Special Session on the atrocities committed by the terrorist group Boko Haram and its effects on human rights in the affected countries. The High Commissioner underlined at the opening of the session that strategies to combat violent extremism must uphold human rights and fundamental freedoms as well as the rule of law. This is not only a matter of principle, and a matter of law: it is also far more effective. Strategies that are not fully grounded in human rights norms feed the grievances that often motivate extremist movements, and undermine the very purpose that they purport to serve; because violent extremism can grow more easily, where human rights are not respected. Profound inequalities, corruption, and resulting marginalization, naturally generate discontent. And the more marginalized and desperate the people, the more likely they are to turn to radical and violent movements.

We must therefore demand that human rights are respected at all times, as the respect for the rule of law, as well as the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms are essential to counter radicalization and to counter violent extremism and to build peaceful and inclusive societies.

At the Human Rights Council, our arsenal against these plights consists of our many mechanisms and procedures. These provide a unique source of knowledge, as well as many practical tools for what we –States- can do to render our societies more inclusive and tolerant.

In this regard, I wish to use the opportunity to underline the important and meaningful work done by the Council’s Special Procedures. Several of our mandate holders have addressed issues closely related to our discussion today, delivering tangible outcomes in the form of recommendations for practical use by all those concerned.

To name a few examples, in his report to the HRC on violence committed in the name of religion the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or belief, analyses this phenomenon in-depth and identifies concrete steps to be taken to address it. He states that based on respect for everyone’s freedom of religion or belief, Governments should provide an open, inclusive framework in which religious diversity can unfold without discrimination and without fear.

The Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights, in her 2013 report on reconciliation in post-conflict societies, proposes a set of recommendations to ensure a multi-perspective approach in history teaching, which can lead to a better understanding of contemporary challenges of exclusion and violence. Historical truth is hard to come by. It is sought wherever violence, war and civil war have rent societies asunder. It is an essential requirement for any rapprochement or reconciliation in society; without it, it would be unimaginable, impossible to build up a joint future. By opening spaces to a variety of narratives regarding the past and representations of that past, history teaching and memorial practices can foster critical thought, analytic learning and debate- all crucial elements in building solid grounds for reconciliation.

Also the Special Rapporteur on minorities focused in her latest report on hate speech and incitement to hatred against minorities in the media. She highlights that the media, including online and social media, as an essential component of modern societies, have an important role to play and hold great responsibility in representing a platform for promoting tolerance and inclusiveness rather than discrimination, exclusion and incitement of hostility. Similarly, governments, civil society and the international community must be alert to the warning signs of hatred and violence much earlier: when the first words of hate speech are uttered. Other special procedures which have dealt with the topic extensively have been the Special Rapporteurs on racism as well as on freedom of expression.

Furthermore, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence is also working, from a different angle, on this important issue. He, for instance, states clearly in his work that there can never be a short-cut to reconciliation after human rights violations. In order for something to count as a justice measure, it has to be accompanied by an acknowledgment of responsibility and it has to be linked, precisely, to truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence.

In addition to the Special Procedures, the Universal Periodic Review, a review of the human rights records of all UN Member States, a truly innovative mechanism of our Council, can be utilized as a tool in countering the challenges we face. Having reached almost the end of its second cycle, the UPR increasingly serves as a yardstick for progress on human rights providing us with data and allowing us all to evaluate this progress, correct deficiencies and devise remedial actions. More crucially, it can contribute to early- warning, revealing worrisome trends within political, civil, economic, social and cultural rights. In this way the UPR can help in the early detection of human rights violations and abuses and can provide an invaluable contribution to conflict prevention.

Through these mechanisms we can provide substantive contributions and expertise to the work of the UN system as a whole in promoting tolerance and countering violent extremism and hatered. In this way we can complement and help effectuate broader initiatives, such as the Rabat Plan of Action on the prohibition of advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence. This outcome document, resulting from four OHCHR regional expert workshops sets out a clear pathway on how to balance between Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which provides for freedom of expression, and Article 20, which prohibits incitement of discrimination, hostility or violence. It also highlights the critical role human rights play in creating an environment in which a constructive discussion about religious matters could be held. States can usefully draw on the Rabat Plan’s conclusions and recommendations in order to take concrete actions to both combat intolerance and promote plurality of opinion.

Looking beyond the Human Rights Council and the United Nations system, we should tap into the wealth of knowledge at our disposal on the national, regional and international level and utilise existing instruments to the fullest to guide us through this gargantuan challenge. In this respect, one important guiding tool is the ‘Nuremberg Declaration on Peace and Justice’. It contains concrete recommendations on dealing with the past and on addressing the root causes of conflict and intolerance in a manner that affected societies perceived as legitimate and just. It also constitutes a guide for all stakeholders in promoting reconciliation, rebuilding relationships and strengthening the capacity of societies to transform themselves and overcome their animosities.