A/HRC/18/36 Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime, concerning the criminalisation of acts of a racist and xenophobic nature committed through computer systems, referred to xenophobic acts committed via the Internet without any link or connection to nationality. With regard to the legal basis of general comments and concluding observations, during reviews of States parties, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination inquired about the implementation of the provisions of the Convention at the national level and not the domestication of the Committee’s general comments. A victim could not invoke a general comment in a court of law. The content of general comments might be interesting, but a discussion could be held on how they could be transposed into an instrument: the Chairperson should refer to appropriate experts in that regard on behalf of the Ad Hoc Committee. 47. Brazil expressed appreciation that the Ad Hoc Committee was finally able to hold such substantive discussion, underlining that this was a first brainstorming by the Ad Hoc Committee on the topic of xenophobia. Some questions should be considered collectively by the Ad Hoc Committee, such as the definition of xenophobia versus the broader definition of racial discrimination in the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, the need to always reflect on the implications for potential victims, and seeking of the views of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, since a possible additional protocol would likely be monitored thereby. The Committee’s views would not be determining, but could prove a starting point from the Ad Hoc Committee’s considerations, since their views would have bearing on how a potential protocol would work in practice. 48. The United States of America welcomed the discussion on issues of substance, specifically on what measures were currently used to address manifestations of xenophobia and the effectiveness of such measures. The prohibited grounds for discrimination outlined in the Convention were broad enough to cover manifestations of xenophobia based on those protected grounds. The delegate reiterated that efforts were best focused on promoting concrete actions to address the scourge of racism, noting that the United States did not believe that new definitions or norms were necessary. He looked forward to hearing other States’ experience and gave examples of how federal legislation in the United States implemented United States obligations under the Convention, and how such laws and policy measures enabled the United States to combat acts of xenophobia. 49. Zimbabwe stated that xenophobia had already been defined, as it appeared alongside racism, racial discrimination and related intolerance in the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. As had been contested, xenophobia could not be equated to racism or racial discrimination – the Convention was clear; however, in some instances there could be linkages. 50. Botswana noted the need for the Ad Hoc Committee to be free of fear in order to consider the topic of xenophobia, noting that Botswana and South Africa had had xenophobic experiences domestically in recent years. It would be useful to gather a compilation of incidents and occurrences from around the world to assist in examining the issue of xenophobia. In addition, it was important to determine the relationship between and assess xenophobia and other known abominations. Implementation issues should be dealt with in conjunction with substantive discussions on xenophobia and the consequences thereof should be considered. 51. The delegate from Switzerland questioned whether a definition of xenophobia was really required and whether manifestations of xenophobia had been appropriately treated by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination or not. In agreement with Brazil, Switzerland noted that as that Committee was on the front line, it would be important to have the opinion of its experts. Switzerland underlined the need to build upon the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and queried whether a legal 10