A/63/161 B. International legal standards 1. Citizenship dependent on affiliation with a particular religion 39. The State determines the criteria on the basis of which citizenship is accorded. However, it may not do this in a discriminatory manner, such as making a distinction on the basis of religion or belief. From the perspective of human rights law it seems impossible to justify the denial of citizenship to applicants who are not members of the majority religion in a given State. Consequently, in her country reports, the Special Rapporteur has encouraged legislators to consider introducing amendments to the citizenship law to bring it into compliance with treaty obligations, particularly with regard to non-discrimination provisions. 34 40. The principle of non-discrimination can be found in various international and regional human rights instruments. Article 2 (1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights prohibits discrimination on the grounds of religion, as do article 2 (2) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, article 30 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, article 5 (d) (7) of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, article 14 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights) and article 1 of the American Convention on Human Rights. The 1981 Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief calls on all States to “take effective measures to prevent and eliminate discrimination on the grounds of religion or belief in the recognition, exercise and enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms in all fields of civil, economic, political, social and cultural life” (art. 4 (1)). 41. One example of a discriminatory action with regard to citizenship on the basis of religion or belief could be where an individual’s application to obtain citizenship is denied because the applicant, or his or her spouse, wears a religious symbol. The Swiss Federal Tribunal recently adjudicated that wearing a headscarf is a manifestation of the constitutionally protected right to freedom of religion or belief which should be interpreted in the light of the prohibition of discrimination. The Tribunal found that the mere wearing of a headscarf does not indicate a lack of respect for the constitutional order and consequently the decision not to grant citizenship to the woman in question violated the principle of equality. 35 In France, however, the citizenship application of a Salafi Muslim woman from Morocco who wears a black burka and reportedly lives in total submission to her male relatives was rejected in 2005 on the grounds of insufficient assimilation. The French Council of State recently upheld the rejection, arguing that the women’s adoption of a “radical practice of her religion [was] incompatible with the essential values of the French community, in particular the principle of equality of the sexes”. 36 42. Migrants seem to be in a particularly vulnerable position, inter alia, with regard to their freedom of religion or belief. Immigration policies and citizenship tests must not discriminate on the basis of the applicant’s religious background. In this regard concerns about the contents of questionnaires and interview guidelines __________________ 34 35 36 14 A/HRC/4/21/Add.3 (on the Maldives), para. 67. Tribunal Fédéral Suisse, judgements 1D_11/2007 and 1D_12/2007 of 27 February 2008 (German only). Conseil d’État, decision No. 286798 of 27 June 2008 (French only). 08-43442