A/HRC/42/58 identified first and then that the Committee should look into the criminalization of those acts. 67. The representative of Costa Rica stated that her delegation could support the proposal from the African Group, as issues of hate speech and online or offline discrimination were not sufficiently covered in existing international standards. It was important to eliminate the possibility of discriminating on social platforms and online. There was also a need to strike a balance between freedom of expression and opinion and the issue of addressing hate speech. 68. The representative of the European Union stated that the mandate of the Committee continued to change from paragraph 199 of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action to the present Human Rights Council and General Assembly mandates. She also stated that the European Union was of the view that there were no gaps in the Convention and asserted that the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination had also stated this. She cautioned that drafting an additional protocol would undermine the work of that Committee. As the Ad Hoc Committee continued to move ahead on the new mandates, the European Union would reiterate this same position. 69. The representative of the Indigenous Peoples and Nations Coalition agreed with the European Union statement that a broad mandate was proposed in paragraph 199 of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, but he said that in his view it did not preclude an additional protocol being developed. As such he would draft suggestions for the Ad Hoc Committee regarding procedural and substantive gaps. 70. The representative of Switzerland agreed with the statement of the European Union stating that the gaps in the Convention were not that evident and that members of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination were working on the relevant issues in a pragmatic way. She added that the elements for an instrument being proposed by the African Group might not be compatible with articles 19 and 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 71. The representative of Angola stated that there were indeed gaps between the speech that was being tolerated and the negative repercussions evident on all continents in real life, which were an assault on human dignity. Furthermore, the Convention created in 1965 could not anticipate eradicating racism on or through the Internet, as it was not an issue at that time. She added that information technology companies must be held responsible for the dissemination of hate speech. 72. The representative of South Africa stated that since the 1960s, the situation had become much worse for victims of racial discrimination and that colonialism continued to mutate. He added that the human rights space was shrinking and that seminal efforts to deal with racism should not be undermined. It was important to augment the Convention and the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, and continue to consider in an open-minded manner elements that could form an additional protocol. 73. The representative of Japan stated that her delegation aligned itself with the positions of the European Union and Switzerland, stating that there were no gaps in the Convention and adding that the most effective way to address racism was to implement the Convention. 74. The representative of Nepal stated that issues of racism existed in the long history of humankind but that the issues concerning digital space dated back only about 30 years. He added that it was important to take action in a cautious manner and that information technology professionals and experts should be consulted in the work of the Committee. 75. The representative of Gambia stated that the need for an additional protocol was due to the consequential harm of racial discrimination which was taking place. He added that further harm in the future could be anticipated. 76. The representative of the European Union stated that in reading the reports of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, it could be seen that they were addressing several issues of racial discrimination, such as xenophobia and hate speech. 12