A/HRC/21/59 xenophobic atmosphere often resulted from sudden changes in the social fabric of countries: for example, a country of net emigration suddenly becoming one of significant immigration. 54. Morocco noted that victims of discrimination and xenophobia felt a lack of justice and it was important to provide support to them. He noted the need to singularly condemn xenophobia as it was truly an international phenomenon. He underscored the primary roles to be played by leaders such as the heads of State and senior public officials and personalities. Morocco also informed that in July 2011, a new constitution was adopted by referendum, containing provisions protecting human rights and several articles against discrimination. The provisions in the constitution hold everyone responsible and any Government will be obligated to implement it. He said the Government ―anticipated‖ the recommendation about monitoring mechanisms by envisaging such in article 19 of the constitution. Moreover article 23 of the constitution forbids incitement to hatred and violence, which is a punishable crime. 55. Senegal, on behalf the African Group, welcomed the comments of Morocco and the information it shared about its new constitution. He also agreed with some of the comments of the Italian delegate. He noted difficulty in finding the term xenophobia in Mr. Breen‘s text, which also did not tackle the definitional issue. He reiterated that access to justice was linked to the problem of legal definition, and was needed in order for victims to have access to reparations. 56. The delegate of South Africa noted that the verification of sources of information used for the countries in Appendix of the Framework for Action paper underlay many of the concerns expressed. She pointed out that sometimes victims and affected communities were unsure whom to turn to as they felt that the police had the same sentiments as the perpetrators. In this regard, she inquired about the role of civil society and human rights defenders. 57. The United States of America explained that disaggregated crime data in the United States were useful in assessing progress; however, he noted the more open and transparent a country was the more problematic its domestic situation might appear as there would be no information from countries that are closed and highly controlled and do not report such information. He asked how reporting could be presented in a way to give incentive to countries to report. 58. The European Union aligned itself with the previous statement of Liechtenstein agreeing with the need for a comprehensive approach, including measures for social inclusion and for combating intolerance. The focus on xenophobic violence was shared by the EU, where it was addressed along with other forms of bias motivated violence. The delegate said that multiple forms of discrimination could also be addressed by the holistic approach. The EU supported Morocco‘s intervention with regard to the important role played by political as well as religious and community leaders. 59. The delegate of Switzerland said that Mr. Breen was the only expert to recommend the development of legislation and underlined the need to have a coherent approach to all types of violence and not to be selective. She asked about suggestions with regard to the nature of the legislation that needs to be adopted: with respect to punishment of crimes, implications for third parties, and the classification of hate speech. The delegate noted that no society was immune to discriminatory messages and discourse concerning foreigners, migrants and refugees by political leaders. It was important for society to remain vigilant about these ―myths‖ created about foreigners and the issues of immigration, employment and criminality. 60. Pakistan, on behalf of Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, pointed out that xenophobic violence was a global phenomenon requiring a corresponding international 31