Dear moderator, dear participants!

A year ago, at a similar plenary session, we talked about a campaign against migrant workers, primarily from Central Asian countries, that was unfolding in Russia. The situation has only deteriorated further over the past year.

Politicians propose new discriminatory bills, and officials make increasingly harsh statements, including racist ones.

The authorities' reaction to the horrific terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall in Moscow last March was a clear instance of ethnic profiling. The televised display of extremely cruel treatment toward the detained suspects garnered strong support from ultra-right groups and further fueled the flames of ethnic xenophobia.

Hate crimes are surging, even though the problem appeared largely resolved by authorities' efforts just two years ago. We anticipate the number of hate crimes this year to revert to levels seen in the early 2010s.

More moderate xenophobic activists are now acting as vigilantes. This behavior has spread across nearly the entire country and is rapidly increasing in frequency. These individuals face minimal resistance from law enforcement agencies, even when threatening migrants with violence, checking their documents, and so on.

Of course, these problems are not unique to Russia.

Governments of all countries should control the speech of their public officials whose freedom of speech is limited by their status.

The activities of vigilante groups, which often operate at the edge of legality, require stricter oversight. Effective mechanisms should be developed to control these groups.

Governments should follow the well-established recommendations on countering hate crimes.

As for countering hate speech, the OSCE still has no general recommendations. These should finally be created - of course, only as recommendations, taking into account the diversity of national legislations.

Our recommendations will be presented in greater detail in the conference's public database.

Our recommendations

For ODIHR OSCE:

1. Based on the existing experience of comparative analysis of the legislation of the participating countries in countering hate crimes, to conduct a comparative analysis of a wider range of national legislation in the field of combating intolerance, particularly legislation that deals with incitement to hatred, discrimination, and the activities of the groups concerned.

2. To supplement the comparative analysis of legislation with the comparative analysis of law enforcement in the OSCE member states, primarily related to countering hate crimes and incitement to hatred.

For OSCE Member States:

1. To adjust crime recording systems so that suspected hate motive could be recorded at any stage, including at the earliest stage of the crime-recording process. The investigation of hate crimes is more effective when conducted by specialized units, but it should also be conducted by ordinary police units.

2. To publish the statistics on hate crimes, including their types, regions, and the number of victims. The official statistics should be based on both court decisions (both proven and unproven cases) and the number of opened criminal investigations.

3. To make more active use of the information collected by NGOs engaged in systematic monitoring of the activities of racist groups and to consult with NGOs regarding law enforcement issues.

4. To evaluate national hate speech laws and their enforcement and implementation basing on the six-part threshold test proposed by the Rabat Plan of Action on the prohibition of advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility, or violence, adopted by the UN Human Rights Council in 2013, including the so-called six-part test for determining public statements’ real threat.

5. To develop and adopt comprehensive anti-discrimination laws containing effective and valid rules and procedures to prove discrimination.

6. Public officials should have no right to express publicly their intolerance or disrespect to any ethnic, religious or similar groups. Civil service legislation should include effective sanctions against such actions. These penalties also need to be made public. This policy should also be implemented in situations of crises of any kind and military conflicts.