A/HRC/2/6 page 10 discrimination and also guarantee the right to freedom of expression. But they also vary in significant ways in the way they deal with the issues and in striking the balance between the prohibition of hate speech and the right to freedom of expression. 29. The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR)27 does not have a specific provision prohibiting incitement to racial and religious hatred. But general limitation clauses in article 9 (freedom of thought, conscience and religion), article 10 (freedom of expression) and article 11 (freedom of assembly and association) allow for limitations of these rights in the interest of preservation of social and public order, protection of health and morals as well as rights of others. 30. The European Court of Human Rights has read these limitation clauses to permit the prohibition of incitement to racial and/or religious hatred. For example, article 17 of ECHR stipulates that the provisions of the Convention may not be interpreted as granting the right to engage in any activity aimed at the destruction of any of the rights it proclaims, or at limiting them further than is provided for in the Convention. This has been relied upon by the European Court of Human Rights as justifying hate speech laws but not as necessarily requiring them. 28 31. The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights29 (ACHPR), similarly, has no express reference to racial and religious hatred. Nevertheless, several provisions of ACHPR that provide for limitations on people’s right to receive and disseminate information, as well its recognition of duties as well as rights, which include requirements that rights should be exercised with due regard for the rights of others (art. 27), and to respect others and to maintain relations aimed at promoting respect and tolerance (art. 28), could be relied upon to justify hate-speech laws. 32. Only the American Convention on Human Rights30 (ACHR) specifically provides for the banning of hate speech in its article 13(5), which provides that: “Any propaganda for war and any advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred that constitute incitements to lawless violence or to any other similar illegal action against any person or group of persons on any grounds including those of race, colour, religion, language, or national origin shall be considered as offenses punishable by law”. 33. Like the international instruments, the regional instruments leave many issues unexplained and do not provide much detail on specific interpretations and how to reconcile apparent inconsistencies among their provisions. III. THE INTERPRETATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE LAW 34. Although the international human rights instruments as well as regional instruments and national jurisprudence clearly establish that incitement to racial and religious hatred can be proscribed and sanctioned, the interpretation and implementation of the law has been highly uneven and problematic. Many of the key concepts are not uniformly defined and there is a lot of ambiguity about critical issues such as the objectives of the law, the extent of the public harm that should warrant limitations on essential freedoms, the limit that can appropriately be placed on freedom of expression and other freedoms, and the nature and scope of sanctions and remedies that can be applied against offending speech.