A/HRC/28/66 20. The Special Rapporteur is convinced that policies aimed at overcoming violence in the name of religion must be based on a comprehensive understanding of all underlying factors and responsible actors. This is the sine qua non for mobilizing all relevant stakeholders to do their utmost to eliminate such violence. C. Root causes, factors and political circumstances 21. Violence committed in the name of religion is a complex reality. Given the word limits of the present report, the Special Rapporteur will restrict himself to a few nonexhaustive typological observations.8 1. Narrow-minded interpretations of religions 22. For many people, religion is a very emotional issue, deeply connected to feelings of identity, devotion and group attachment. Religious convictions can drive people to push their boundaries and perform acts of solidarity, compassion and charity. However, this enormous potential can also turn into a destructive force, feeding collective polarization, narrow-mindedness and violent fanaticism. 23. Religious fanaticism is a danger that exists in different religions and beliefs. Attempts to derive a propensity for violence directly from specific theological features of particular religions are highly problematic. Not only do they fail to do justice to the wide range of violent manifestations connected to most different religions and beliefs, including secular worldviews; they also neglect the decisive factor of human agency as pointed out before. 24. Although most religions claim a transcendent — and in this sense “trans-human” — origin, religious sources and normative codes of conduct always accommodate different readings that are actively undertaken by human beings. Thus, human agency is inevitably involved in interpreting religious traditions, dogmas, laws or identities. Open-minded interpretations that encourage tolerance, empathy and solidarity across boundaries may exist alongside narrow-minded interpretations of the same religion, which lead to polarized worldviews and a militant rejection of people holding other persuasions. Whatever the ultimate origins of a religious belief are thought to be, human beings bear in any case responsibility for the practical consequences that they draw from the interpretation of their faith. This particularly applies to religious teachers, preachers and community leaders, whose influence should always be connected with an enhanced sense of responsibility. 25. Whenever violence is justified by the invocation of religion or arrogated to religious tenets, the specific interpretations, for example, religious ideas, concepts, images or anxieties, should be taken seriously. Although they should not be seen in isolation from broader political and other factors, it would be too easy simply to dismiss polarizing religious interpretations as mere excuses for acts of aggression. At the same time, the pitfalls of essentialism can be avoided by bearing in mind that it is always human beings, in their various roles and positions, who remain the responsible agents for any justifications and commission of violence. 2. Loss of trust in public institutions 26. The seeds of religious fanaticism fortunately do not always find fertile ground. Whereas in many societies those promoting religious narrow-mindedness, violence or even terrorism do not succeed in mobilizing many followers, in other countries their 8 See also A/HRC/25/58, paras. 16-70. 7