A/HRC/22/51 34. States’ obligations to respect, protect and fulfil the human rights of persons belonging to religious minorities in any case cannot be limited to the members of those communities which already happen to possess a specific status as recognized religious minorities. Rather, specifically recognized status positions can become an instrument for facilitating more effective enjoyment of freedom of religion or belief of people who de facto live in a minority situation. Moreover, the Human Rights Committee has pointed out that the enjoyment of the rights of persons belonging to minorities cannot be confined to nationals, citizens or permanent residents of a particular State, but that migrant workers also and even visitors constituting such minorities should not be denied the exercise of those rights.8 35. Specific status positions accorded by the State can never be the point of departure when it comes to defining the application of human rights, since this would turn the normative order of rights upside down and would violate the overarching human rights principle of normative universalism. Rather, positive measures on behalf of members of religious minorities should serve the purpose of providing efficient protection for all those people who may be in need of such measures to be able to fully enjoy their freedom of religion or belief on the basis of non-discrimination and to have long-term prospects of upholding and developing their group-related religious identities. C. Violations 1. Multifaceted motives and settings 36. Violations of freedom of religion or belief of persons belonging to religious minorities occur in various regions of the world and originate from many different motives. For instance, they may be perpetrated in the name of religious or ideological truth claims, in the interest of fostering national cohesion, under the pretext of defending law and order or in conjunction with counter-terrorism agendas. Existing stereotypes and prejudices against minorities are sometimes connected with historical traumas and national mythologies and may also be publicly stoked for purposes of political mobilization or to target scapegoats. 37. Violations of the rights of persons belonging to religious minorities are perpetrated by States or non-State actors or – quite frequently – a combination of both. The likeliness of human rights violations by the State usually increases when a tight law and order agenda blends with political invocations of national identity, a pattern occurring in quite a number of countries. Typical targets of such restrictive policies are members of those religious or belief groups that have, or are said to have, a tendency to evade State control and, at the same time, are perceived as not really fitting into the historical and cultural makeup of the country. 38. Furthermore, in situations of protracted conflict, de facto authorities exercising government-like functions may also target members of religious minorities, especially if they are regarded as being “on the other side”. In this context, the Special Rapporteur would like to reiterate that the international community, Member States and all relevant de facto entities exercising government-like functions should direct all their efforts to ensuring that there are no human rights protection gaps and that all persons can effectively enjoy their fundamental rights, including freedom of religion or belief, wherever they live. 39. Violations perpetrated by non-State actors frequently occur in a political climate of impunity, thus indicating direct or indirect State involvement or even a human rights protection vacuum. At times incidents of discrimination or violence seem to break out 8 10 CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.5, para. 5.2.